I've always liked that idea Stefan. -Jacob
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Stefan Karpinski <[email protected]>wrote: > I always just read them like this: > > cond "and" do_something > cond "or" do_something > > > That seems like it reads pretty naturally to me. This is also one of the > reasons I've occasionally brought up the idea of having "and" and "or" > keywords. > > > On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Leah Hanson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I'm not so sure about i == 1 && do_stuff() being readable, but I think >> it's better than do_stuff() if i==1. Every time I see i==1 && do_stuff(), I >> have to stop and reason about what it's doing, but at least it isn't >> tricky. With && either you can read it easily, or you see that something >> weird is going on; with end of line if's, it's always this surprising thing >> where you need to reconsider the preceding part of the line (which makes it >> much more appealing for the person *writing* the code than the one >> *reading* it. >> >> -- Leah >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Jacob Quinn <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> I agree. I've never liked python's do_stuff() if i == 1. It's too >>> disconcerting to parse what's going on and then have to backtrack and think >>> about the condition that came afterwards. I've found the i == 1 && >>> do_stuff() has become really natural after only using it a few times. >>> >>> -Jacob >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Ivar Nesje <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> The suffix `if` and `unless` is the reason I never managed to become >>>> literate in Ruby. Maybe it is just a matter of time and experience, but I >>>> read code lines from left to right, and my mental read buffer is not long >>>> enough to see the `if` that someone hid at the end of the line. >>>> >>> >>> >> >
