Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #63263
| From | Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Postfix conditionals |
| Date | 2014-01-05 21:58 -0500 |
| References | <52C9BF95.5000006@gkayaalp.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.5002.1388977145.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
On 1/5/2014 3:24 PM, Göktuğ Kayaalp wrote:
> Hi,
>
> AFAIK, we do not have "postfix conditionals" in Python, i.e. a condition
> appended to a
> statement, which determines whether the statement runs or not:
>
> py> for i in [False]:
> ... break if not i
>
> The above piece of code is equivalent to this in Python:
>
> py> for i in [False]:
> ... if not i
> ... break
>
> I believe that the first example is superior to the second example when
> the two is compared
> for readability and intuitiveness. We already have a ternary statement
'conditional expression', which happens to be a ternary as opposed to
binary expression.
> that looks similar,
>
> py> print('hi') if True else None
>
> so I reckon there would be no breakage in old code if this kind of
> syntax was added. Ruby has
> this, and AFAIK Perl also does.
>
> I lack the knowledge of whether the community has opinions on this kind
> of notation,
In general, negative on pure duplication. Guido has said he strongly
dislikes the perl reverse if.
--
Terry Jan Reedy
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Postfix conditionals Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-01-05 21:58 -0500
csiph-web