re: We don't need a ternary operator VIEW POST

TOP OF THREAD FULL DISCUSSION
re: First, pretty well all of the Lisp family have a ternary operator ... the 'if' expression. The observation that the true/false branch operatoronly ...
 

Oh, I definitely think we need the functionality. I think part of my intent of the article didn't come across. I mean we don't need a ternary operator because we could instead define two binary operators which are more generic, and also fulfill the conditional evaluation expression.

My concern about parsing is strictly due to the ternary syntax. Once we have binary operators it can be parsed, by machine and humans, the same way as other binaries and thus be even easier to understand.

code of conduct - report abuse