On 05/02/16 09:22, Lukasz Sokol wrote: > Hi, > > On 04/02/16 21:33, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: >> >> >> On Thu, 4 Feb 2016, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote: >> >>> Disappointed :( >> >> Well, such is life. I'm also disappointed that my bank account doesn't >> contain millions. But I learned to live with it :-) >> >> But all hope is not lost yet. >> >>> Why was it done? I thought that pretty much everyone was in favor? >> >> Not quite, form was also deemed important. It is a tricky balance. >> >> To recapitulate: >> >> There were various choices: >> >> a) not adding at all >> b) a ? b : c >> c) if a then b else c >> d) iif() (or some variant thereof) > > what of > e) some kind of assignment, requiring use of braces, e.g. > x := ( if condition then truevalue else flasevalue ); > or > x := ( condition then truevalue else falsevalue ); > > ... ? > > It also does not clash with function names, only reuses same keywords...
An as reusing keywords is a no-no... I wrote x := ( condition, true := truevalue, false:=falsevalue); in previous email; but since true and false are constants (and reserved names) too, maybe, actually, a new keyword (pair) would be actually OK ? x := (condition; whentrue:=truevalue; whenfalse:=falsevalue); ? yes requiring use of assignment, braces, and assignments inside braces. [...] > > el es > el es _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
