For review: PEP 308 - If-then-else expression

[Paul Rubin]

"Simon Burton" <simonb at webone.com.au> writes:
> +1 from me.
> 
> after this:
> "[ x for x in range(10) if is_special(x) ]",
> 
> to have this ternary construct:
> "x if is_special(x) else y"
> 
> seems reasonable enough.

You know, if the inspiration for this syntax (condition in the middle)
is list comprehensions, maybe the thing can be improved by requiring
parentheses around the expression:

  (x if is_special(x) else y)

For some reason I find that clearer than the same thing without the parens.

I still prefer a syntax with the condition first, then the two exprs,
but can live with it either way.


> Perhaps the "else <expr2>" can default to "else None".

I'm neutral on that.  It has good and bad points that have been
discussed already.