Yet Another PEP308 syntax
Roman Suzi
rnd at onego.ru
Mon Feb 10 11:39:25 EST 2003
On Mon, 10 Feb 2003, David Eppstein wrote:
>In article <mailman.1044892786.2769.python-list at python.org>,
> Gerrit Holl <gerrit at nl.linux.org> 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 onego.ru =\= My AI powered by Linux RedHat 7.3
More information about the Python-list
mailing list