> If this is just for fun, why stop with just "trinary"? (Which BTW is a non-word; the correct term is "ternary".) > How about one of the following (depending on ease of parsing)? > These look even more like list comprehension. > > x = (e1 if c1 e2 if c2 e3 if c3 ... else d) Doesn't parse. The concatenation of two expressions is not always distinguishable from a single expression: consider c1 = f and c2 = (1, 2). > x = (e1 if c1 else e2 if c2 else e3 if c3 ... else d) That works. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4