Re: Re: Re: if-else vs. tertiary effieciency?

Think of it as:


   print ( $boolean ? $true_value : $false_value );
[download]

or in your terms:


   print ( if($var}{ 
             'yes'
           }else{
             'no'
           }
   );
[download]

I like this less because it is pseudo-code that looks
much like code. So it seems to imply many things that
aren't true. The conditional operator is only an
operator not a statement.

Comment on Re: Re: Re: if-else vs. tertiary effieciency? Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
RE³: if-else vs. tertiary effieciency? by blaze (Friar) on Sep 15, 2002 at 05:31 UTC
so the print isnt part of the ?: in fruiture's example...if thats the case then it makes beautiful sense and i cant believe i didnt see it before, if thats not the case im a little more lost than i was to begin with :) ill be sure to ++ you when i get my next set of votes ;)	[reply]
Re^4: if-else vs. tertiary effieciency? by Aristotle (Chancellor) on Sep 15, 2002 at 07:43 UTC
If in doubt, deparse: `$ perl -MO=Deparse,-p -e'print $var ? "yes" : "no";' print(($var ? 'yes' : 'no')); -e syntax OK` [download] The ternary operator here has a higher precedence than the `print` that works as a list operator, so Perl does the right thing. Makeshifts last the longest.	[reply] [d/l]