Op 2005-09-07, Terry Reedy schreef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > "Kay Schluehr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> No, as I explained it is not a ternary operator and it can't easily be >> implemented using a Python function efficiently because Python does not >> support lazy evaluation. > > By *carefully* using the flow-control operators 'and' and 'or', you can > often get what you want *now*, no PEP required.
Which is why I don't understand the resistance against introducing such a beast. Whether it is a ternary operator or something more general, the proposed construction are usually more readable than the python construction with the same functionality. The decorator syntax IMO provided much less improvement in readability for functionality that was already provided and that got implemented. A ternary operator (or suitable generalisation) would IMO provide a greater improvement what readability is concerned but is resisted all the way. -- Antoon Pardon -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
