PEP 308: Pep Update

[AdSR]

"James J. Besemer" <jb at cascade-sys.com> wrote

> > The use of ?: seems  more appropriate for smaller terms, 
>  > and if/else for larger ones.
> 
> If adopting both forms was a possibility, we'd have that luxury.
> 
> Personally, I rather think that ?: fits most naturally with expressions and 
> keywords fits most naturally with statements.  Certainly, this reflects my 
> decades of C background.  But more than that, I think there's a natural 
> association in that expression operators tend to be punctuation based, while 
> statements virtually always are associated with keywords (all but assignment).

With C/Java background, I also prefer ?: even though it may be
cryptic. And as we often want to make a ternary fit in one line, ?:
saves us a few characters.

People without any background for ?: could get confused though, as ':'
often opens a block - it doesn't here! One option could be to use '@'
instead of ':'. It resembles 'e' a little, which could make it easier
to read (as short for 'else'). But then, '@' stands for 'at' - who
knows what other more appropriate use it may find in the future.

This leaves me with keyword options. I guess the parenthesized (if
<expr>: <expr1> else: <expr2>) is the best choice.

Cheers,

AdSR