From: gwtmp01@...
Date: 2005-05-12T11:25:30+09:00
Subject: Re: alternatives to ? : contruct


On May 11, 2005, at 7:41 PM, Mark Hubbart wrote:
> First of all, it's the ternary operator :)
>
Yep. My bad.

Since Ruby already has two version of this, a new
third version, would be the tertiary operator. :-)

Gary Wright