From: Jason Foreman <threeve.org@...>
Date: 2005-05-12T05:31:42+09:00
Subject: Re: alternatives to ? : contruct

On 5/11/05, gwtmp01@mac.com <gwtmp01@mac.com> wrote:
> On May 11, 2005, at 4:07 PM, Jason Foreman wrote:
> >
> > I'd prefer it with less ;'s as well:
> >
> > a = if (y==z): b else c end
> 
> Is this really better than:
> 
>      a = (y==z) ? b : c
> 
> ?
> 
> The tertiary operator ?: can be used if you want
> something terse and "if then else end" if you want something
> more verbose.  I'm not sure I see the need for yet another
> variation.
> 
> Gary Wright
> 
> 

I agree, I don't want another operator, when the existing ones are
more than sufficient.  I personally try never to use the tertiary
operator anyway, because when I come back to read it later its not
always immediately obvious to me, but "if else end" always is obvious.

Jason