From: Logan Capaldo <logancapaldo@...>
Date: 2005-05-12T08:16:21+09:00
Subject: Re: alternatives to ? : contruct

On 5/11/05, John-Mason P. Shackelford <jpshack@gmail.com> wrote:
> As an alternative to:
> 
> a = y == z ? b : c
> 
> we can say:
> 
> a = (b if y == x) || c
> 
> Can anyone think of others?
> 
> I'd really like to be able to say:
> 
> a = b if y==z otherwise c
> 
> but the precedence of _or_ is not low enough for this to work. Would
> changing the precedence of _or_ to be lower than expression modifiers
> brake much? I believe _or_ is presently just above the expression
> modifiers today. Then again perhaps that would be confusing. Perhaps
> an _otherwise_ operator would do the trick.
> 
> This is trivial really, but ruby specializes in niceties which many
> might deem trivial but which all add up to an amazingly productive
> environment.
> 
> --
> John-Mason Shackelford
> 
> Software Developer
> Pearson Educational Measurement
> 
> 2510 North Dodge St.
> Iowa City, IA 52245
> ph. 319-354-9200x6214
> john-mason.shackelford@pearson.com
> http://pearsonedmeasurement.com
> 
> 

Heres one way:

x == y and a = b or c