Re: [go-nuts] Re: Go if else syntax .. suggested replacement

2019-04-24 Thread Matt Harden
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 8:42 PM David Koblas wrote: > IMHO I've wanted a switch expression, rather than a switch statement for a > while. > I've wanted that too, but what we already have really isn't that bad. > value := switch test { > case true => "red" > case false => "blue" > } > > value

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Go if else syntax .. suggested replacement

2019-04-24 Thread David Koblas
IMHO I've wanted a switch expression, rather than a switch statement for a while. value := switch test { case true => "red" case false => "blue" } or value := switch item.(type) { case int => item case string => strconv.Atoi(item) case time.Time => {     ... something more involved .

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Go if else syntax .. suggested replacement

2019-04-24 Thread Robert Engels
Wow that was some bad typing + bad auto correct... > On Apr 24, 2019, at 9:15 PM, Robert Engels wrote: > > 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.

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Go if else syntax .. suggested replacement

2019-04-24 Thread Robert Engels
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) ? {

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Go if else syntax .. suggested replacement

2019-04-24 Thread Dan Kortschak
I don't think that's an answer to my comment. Was it intended to be? lgodio wrote that they wanted ternary operators, but were not advocating that it be possible to allow nested ternary operations. I don't see how this is possible if you write the grammar as the only sensible interpretation TernE

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Go if else syntax .. suggested replacement

2019-04-24 Thread Michael Jones
switch test { case true: //..code block for test=true case false: //..code block for test=false } On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 4:42 PM Dan Kortschak wrote: > How would you preclude it? > > On Wed, 2019-04-24 at 16:28 -0700, lgod...@gmail.com wrote: > > I am NOT in favor of allowing nested ternary

Re: [go-nuts] Re: Go if else syntax .. suggested replacement

2019-04-24 Thread Dan Kortschak
How would you preclude it? On Wed, 2019-04-24 at 16:28 -0700, lgod...@gmail.com wrote: > I am NOT in favor of allowing nested ternary operations -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving em