No, it should look exactly like the first statement. The ternary operator is very good if you use its value, but if you use it in void context it's just a kludge for an if statement. So 
# bad: ternary in void context: 
exists($checked->{Group}{$GroupDN}) ? ($rc_OK=1) : ($rc_OK=check_group
+($GroupDN,0));

# good: 'if' in void context:
if (exists($checked->{Group}{$GroupDN})) {
   $rc_OK = 1
} else {
   $rc_OK=check_group($GroupDN,0)
}

# also good: ternary in scalar context:
$rc_OK = exists($checked->{Group}{$GroupDN}) ? 1 :  check_group($Group
+DN,0)

[download]

So you have two good, idiomatic ways to express something, and complain that the third is a PITA?

In reply to Re^3: Question about ternary operator by moritz
in thread Question about ternary operator by merlinX

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.