To Kortschak and all others participating in this debate :
Please don't get hung up over my choice of symbol '?' .
My choice of symbol '?' and ';' is causing people to equate my proposal
with a proposal to adopt C's ternary operator in Go. This is not what I
intended to propose.
My proposal regarding ? test {...} : {.. } in is nothing more, nothing
less than a replacement for
if (test) { ... } else {... } i.e. 'if' and 'else' are replaced by
symbols '?' and ';' ..
For example I propose that a statement like ? (x >-1) { y=x; z= x*x } : {
y=x*x; z= y } compile in Go
EXACTLY THE SAME way that Go currently compiles the same statement with
symbol '?' replaced by 'if' and ';' replaced by 'else' . Currently, neither
C++, C nor Go will compile the above statement
The second part of my proposal called for allowing statements like x =
(test) ? 1 : 0 to compile in Go.
C will currently compile this statement but Go will not. But I stress
again, I intended Go to compile this
statement exactly the same way it compiles if (test) { x=1} else { x=0 }
AND that no nested '?' symbols are allowed in a single assignment statement.
In short, I'm proposing a cleaner way to write Go 'if' 'else' statements,
nothing more, nothing less.
If anyone can offer a concrete example of how my proposed statement will
cause problems in Go, just replace my chosen symbol '?' with 'if' and
symbol ';' with 'else' and you'll have a statement that will currently
compile in Go (and cause the same problems)
..
On Thursday, April 25, 2019 at 5:15:23 PM UTC-4, kortschak wrote:
>
> The difference is that the ternary operator is an expression and the
> if...else is a statement. If you're only suggesting a syntax change,
> then the difference becomes one of readability.
>
> I'll ask again, how would you preclude nesting without making the
> language more complex?
>
> On Thu, 2019-04-25 at 13:38 -0700, lgo...@gmail.com <javascript:> wrote:
> > Rob:
> >
> > Am I missing something ??
> > The proposed syntax
> > test ? {
> > } : {
> > }
> >
> > with no-nesting allowed is equivalent to
> > if test {
> > //.....
> > } else {
> > // ..
> > }
> > ..The former is just a cleaner way of writing the latter
> >
> > Any complaints regarding 'abuse' associated with the former equally
> > apply
> > to the latter
> >
> > On Thursday, April 25, 2019 at 11:47:21 AM UTC-4, Rob 'Commander'
> > Pike
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > I am pretty sure that the decision not to have ?: in Go was a
> > > unanimous
> > > decision by Robert, Ken and myself after almost no discussion. It
> > > is too
> > > easy to abuse, as the FAQ states.
> > >
> > > -rob
> > >
> > >
>
--
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.
