ternary operator

Anonymous Monk has asked for the wisdom of the Perl Monks concerning the following question:

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: ternary operator by tmharish (Friar) on Jan 18, 2013 at 06:55 UTC
Short Answer: `$a1=2; $b1=10; ($a1 > $b1) ? ($int = ($a1/$b1)) : ($int = ($b1/$a1)); +print $int;` [download] Better Short Answer: `$a1=2; $b1=10; $int = ($a1 > $b1) ? ($a1/$b1) : ($b1/$a1); print $int;` [download] What it should really be: `use strict ; use warnings ; # Use Better Variable Names. my $a1 = 2 ; my $b1 = 10 ; my $int = ( $a1 > $b1 ) ? ( $a1 / $b1 ) : ( $b1 / $a1 ) ; print $int;` [download] Reasoning: `defined($int = ($a1/$b1))` will always evaluate to true regardless of the values of $a1 and $b1. If you want to check if both $a1 and $b1 are defined you might want to nest it in there like: `my $int = ( defined( $a1 ) and defined( $b1 ) ) ? ( ( $a1 > $b1 ) ? ( +$a1 / $b1 ) : ( $b1 / $a1 ) ) : die( '$a1 and $b1 need to be defined' + ) ;` [download] The other thing to note is that the the Ternary Operator, being an Operator, will return something and so you dont need to do the `$int =` in both the if and else parts.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^2: ternary operator by frozenwithjoy (Priest) on Jan 18, 2013 at 08:55 UTC
Besides checking whether `$a1` and `$b1` are defined, you'd probably also want to verify that the the smaller value is `!= 0`. By now, we are definitely at the point where insisting on using the ternary operator causes needless issues with readability.	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re: ternary operator by davido (Cardinal) on Jan 18, 2013 at 06:54 UTC
Obviously, it's not using strict. ;) Dave	[reply]
Re: ternary operator by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Jan 18, 2013 at 06:44 UTC
Everything! With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday' Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error. "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority". In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.	[reply]
Re: ternary operator by AnomalousMonk (Archbishop) on Jan 18, 2013 at 09:39 UTC
Not enough parentheses.	[reply]