From: Jason Foreman <threeve.org@...>
Date: 2005-05-12T05:07:53+09:00
Subject: Re: alternatives to ? : contruct

On 5/11/05, James Edward Gray II <james@grayproductions.net> wrote:
> On May 11, 2005, at 2:37 PM, John-Mason P. Shackelford wrote:
> 
> > I don't believe one can use _else_ with an expression modifier. If we
> > try to use an if block in this case, things get ugly fast:
> >
> > a = if y == x; b; else; c; end
> >
> > Of course I may be missing something. I need to read more code than
> > just my own :s
> 
> The if ... then ... else ... end statements people have been posting
> are perfectly legal Ruby.  Fire up irb an give them a spin.  It's
> basically just collapsing an if statement to one line, then capturing
> the proper return (since statements return things in Ruby).  The
> "then" is just a pretty replacement for the ; here.
> 
> Hope that helps.
> 
> James Edward Gray II
> 
> 

I'd prefer it with less ;'s as well:

a = if (y==z): b else c end

which works perfectly fine:

irb(main):025:0> a = if (1==2): 'foo' else 'bar' end
=> "bar"

I really don't like the idea of having an else/otherwise/whatever
operator that allows the results of the statement to be the first and
last pieces, and the operators and conditions all squished in the
middle.  B if A else C doesn't read well to me, and would get
confusing I think, whereas if A then B else C is very natural.


Jason