PEP 308: Pep Update
Tim Rowe
tim at remove_if_not_spam.digitig.co.uk
Thu Feb 27 21:13:13 EST 2003
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Thu Feb 27 21:13:13 EST 2003
- Previous message (by thread): PEP 308: Pep Update
- Next message (by thread): PEP 308: Pep Update
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Greg Ewing (using news.cis.dfn.de) wrote: > Tim Rowe wrote: > >> has anybody already pointed out that practically every C/C++ coding >> standard (certainly /all/ I've ever seen) deprecates the use of the ?: >> ternary operator, because it's infamous for producing unmaintainable >> code? > > > But is that because of the idea of a conditional > expression in general, or just the particular > syntax used in C? > I don't know. It's a symptom -- the use of C's ternary operator tends to cause problems -- but I don't know the cause. After reading all the postings, I still don't see why a ternary operator would be of value. Most languages I use don't have one, and in the one that does I don't use it, and it's never affected my ability to effectively express what I've wanted to express.
- Previous message (by thread): PEP 308: Pep Update
- Next message (by thread): PEP 308: Pep Update
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list