this post was submitted on 08 Jun 2025
520 points (97.3% liked)

Programmer Humor

37378 readers
80 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] limdaepl@feddit.org 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

That’s just because you’re used to it. The pythonic ternary is structured like spoken language, which makes it easier to read, especially if you nest them.

Is there an objective argument for the conventional ternary, other than „That’s how we’ve always done it!“?

[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I don't read spoken language, but I do read written ones. The problem with python's ternary is that it puts the condition in the middle, which means you have to visually parse the whole true:expression just to see where the condition starts. Which makes it hard to read for anything but the most trivial examples.

The same goes for comprehensions and generators

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago

The conventional ternary is structured like a normal if-else. In fact, in many languages with functional influence, they're the same thing.

For example, you can write this in Rust:

let vegetable = if 3 > 4 { "Potato" } else { "Tomato" };