Yet Another PEP308 syntax

Roman Suzi rnd at
Mon Feb 10 17:39:25 CET 2003

On Mon, 10 Feb 2003, David Eppstein wrote:

>In article <mailman.1044892786.2769.python-list at>,
> Gerrit Holl <gerrit at> wrote:
>> although I am against a ternary operator, here is Yet Another PEP308
>> syntax:
>> a = ?(test, true_case, false_case)
>> or
>> a = test?(true_case, false_case)
>Why do people keep proposing cryptic punctuation-based syntax for this?
>Using punctuation instead of words makes the meaning non-obvious, 
>especially to new programmers who have not used C/C++/Java, and so it 
>seems unlikely that the BDFL will ever accept it.  Such proposals 
>clutter the discussion without making progress towards getting a ternary 
>included in the language.

I agree. My favorite proposal (I do not remeber who coined it):

ifelse(cond, truepart, falsepart)

Or my own:

check(cond, truepart, falsepart)

Sincerely yours, Roman Suzi
rnd at =\= My AI powered by Linux RedHat 7.3

More information about the Python-list mailing list