I long for a ternary which disallows embedded ternaries. I use this
one-liner, but not happily:
v := a; if t { v = b }
This is not compatible with go fmt, but that tool's effects are
undocumented (see issue 18790 <https://github.com/golang/go/issues/18790>
which was declined), and it has no switches to disable/enable features. A
syntax-aware sed is a good idea, but sadly go fmt destroys useful
constructs. Other examples:
err := fn()
if err != nil { return err }
switch v {
case 1: pkg.one()
case 2: pkg.two()
case 3: pkg.thrice()
}
On Tuesday, August 14, 2018 at 9:43:37 AM UTC-7, Mark Volkmann wrote:
>
> I’m new to Go and I imagine the idea of adding a ternary operator to Go
> has been discussed many times. Rather than repeat that, can someone point
> me to a discussion about why Go doesn’t add this? I’m struggling to
> understand why it is desirable to write code like this:
>
> var color
> if temperature > 100 {
> color = “red”
> } else {
> color = “blue”
> }
>
> Instead of this:
>
> var color = temperature > 100 ? “red” : “blue”
>
> Is the ternary really so confusing that it justifies writing 6 lines of
> code instead of 1? I realize I could eliminate two lines like the
> following, but this isn’t a good idea if the values come from function
> calls since there would sometimes be needless function calls.
>
> var color = “blue”
> if temperature > 100 {
> color = “red”
> }
>
> ---
> R. Mark Volkmann
> Object Computing, Inc.
--
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.
