Your original proposal did not have the colon and also implied the {} were
mandatory. And what stops the sane syntax from. Ring nested ?
> On Apr 24, 2019, at 6:28 PM, lgod...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Just to clarify : My original proposal was to include as part of Go the
> syntax
>
> (test) ? {
> { //..code block for test=true
> } : {
> //..code block for test=false
> }
>
> I am NOT in favor of allowing nested ternary operations
>
> In addition, I also propose allowing un-nested '?' as an alternative
> assignment statement i.e. var = (temp >80) ? "red": "blue"
>
> Thus, any further discussion of this topic should not involve issues related
> to nested ternary operations
>
>> On Tuesday, April 23, 2019 at 9:05:31 PM UTC-4, lgo...@gmail.com wrote:
>> It sure would be nice if Go syntax allowed programmers to replace
>>
>> if ( test) {
>> ...do sonething
>> } else {
>> ..do something else
>> }
>>
>> with
>>
>> ? (test) {
>> //...do something
>> }
>> {
>> //..do something else
>> }
>>
>> The ? operator can be anything the Go language team considers appropriate
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "golang-nuts" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
