[swift-evolution] ternary operator ?: suggestion
vester.gottfried at gmail.com
Thu Dec 17 06:03:25 CST 2015
What do you think about this?
let i = if(x == y, 123, 456)
the second parameter could be optional, so if the condition is false you
would get a nil
let i = if(x == y, 123) // may return nil
making it function like would make a bit more natural to chain other
let i = if(x == y, 123).map( ... )
I am usually not an opponent of the ternary conditional operator, but I do
know instances where beginner were struggling with it, when they first
encountered it. That you cannot google it makes it worse. And in Swift the
question mark has a special meaning regarding optionals, that other
languages don't have.
This is just an quick idea though. I agree with Chris, that we should only
replace it, when we are really sure the new solution is better.
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 4:36 AM, Charles Constant via swift-evolution <
swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:
> One more thought. This syntax would also placate ternary haters. I think
> the traditional complaint about ternary expressions is that people can't
> remember the order of the true and false values. This would not be an issue
> let i = boo ? ( true: 123, false: 456 )
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the swift-evolution