Erik Max Francis max at alcyone.com
Wed Feb 12 21:16:10 EST 2003

• Previous message (by thread): PEP 308 - ternary operator
• Next message (by thread): PEP 308 - ternary operator
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

[Followuping to my own post, sorry.]

Erik Max Francis wrote:

> Michele Simionato wrote:
> 
> > I am not so hot on the built-in function/macro, however I have an
> > idea:
> > why not the syntax "__if__(C,x,y)" ?
> 
> That's better, but still doesn't eliminate the special form, which has
> been explicitly rejected as an option in the PEP.

I retract this statement; the PEP actually explicitly acknowledges this
alternative and insists that it be included in any vote.  (I was
probably mixing the non-short-circuiting form -- which _is_ explicitly
rejected by the PEP -- with this one in my mind.)

Sorry about any confusion I might have caused with that misstatement.

-- 
 Erik Max Francis / max at alcyone.com / http://www.alcyone.com/max/
 __ San Jose, CA, USA / 37 20 N 121 53 W / &tSftDotIotE
/  \ Will I disappoint my future / If I stay
\__/ Sade
    Bosskey.net: Return to Wolfenstein / http://www.bosskey.net/rtcw/
 A personal guide to Return to Castle Wolfenstein.

---

• Previous message (by thread): PEP 308 - ternary operator
• Next message (by thread): PEP 308 - ternary operator
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

---

More information about the Python-list mailing list