Home Original page

PEP-308 a "simplicity-first" alternative

Bengt Richter bokr at oz.net
Tue Feb 11 18:02:55 EST 2003 
On Tue, 11 Feb 2003 20:32:25 +0100, holger krekel <pyth at devel.trillke.net> wrote:
>
>I am still wondering if there is a simple way to fix the current 
>ternary op "x and y or z".  Everybody knows by now that 
>this "fails" if y is a false value.  Otherwise
>it works ok and is used in today's code everywhere. 
>
>Inspired by "do the simplest thing that can possibly work"
>i now think that 
>
>        x and y else z
>
>might just do it and avoid the need for a new construct.  
>It's a very minor change just for fixing the problem at hand.  
>It should be obvious what it does.  
>
+1
I can live with that. Just have to accept that I didn't think of it ;-)

It fits well with the existing short circuiting, and should be
easy to get used to. Of course, I still think my
   
         x -> y -> z

would be easy too (I won't mention what it is the simplest expression of ;-)

Regards,
Bengt Richter
More information about the Python-list mailing list