Re: I love ternary ifs, don't you?
Ed Leafe wrote:
On Nov 18, 2008, at 4:43 PM, Paul McNett wrote:
But yes, I love iif(), and wish Python had it.
def iif(comp, trueVal, falseVal):
return {True: trueVal, False: falseVal}[bool(comp)]
I think that was one of the first Python scripts I ever wrote!
Python DOES have it built in (at least as of 2.5), check 2.5 docs under
What's New - Pep 308 :
x = true_value if condition else false_value
And if you wish a one liner do case then you can do :
x = {'one possibility': 1
, 'another one':2
, 'the next one is numeric':3
, 125: 4}.get(test_expression, 'Not found')
(yup smarties, it is a one liner even if I choose to span it through
multiple lines ;c) )
___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
I love ternary ifs, don't you?
I just love this: llNonCust=iif(alltrim(QuoteInf.cust_num)=='NONE', .t., .f.) Rather than: If alltrim(QuoteInf.cust_num)=='NONE' llNonCust=.t. else llNonCust=.f. endif --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: I love ternary ifs, don't you?
Or llNonCust = ( alltrim(QuoteInf.cust_num)=='NONE' ) -Original Message- From: Matt Slay Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 5:03 PM I just love this: llNonCust=iif(alltrim(QuoteInf.cust_num)=='NONE', .t., .f.) Rather than: If alltrim(QuoteInf.cust_num)=='NONE' llNonCust=.t. else llNonCust=.f. endif ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: I love ternary ifs, don't you?
On Nov 18, 2008, at 4:02 PM, Matt Slay wrote: llNonCust=iif(alltrim(QuoteInf.cust_num)=='NONE', .t., .f.) You like that better than: llNonCust = (ALLTRIM(QuoteInf.cust_num) == NONE) -- Ed Leafe ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: I love ternary ifs, don't you?
Ed Leafe wrote:
On Nov 18, 2008, at 4:43 PM, Paul McNett wrote:
But yes, I love iif(), and wish Python had it.
def iif(comp, trueVal, falseVal):
return {True: trueVal, False: falseVal}[bool(comp)]
I think that was one of the first Python scripts I ever wrote!
I know I could write it; I wish it were built-in.
Paul
___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: I love ternary ifs, don't you?
On Nov 18, 2008, at 6:42 PM, Paul McNett wrote: I know I could write it; I wish it were built-in. I know you could write it, too; I was just pointing out that my first instinct in Python was to mimic the way Fox worked. Since then I've come to appreciate that it isn't built-in. What if instead of choosing between two states, you wanted to choose between 3? Or 4? Or 16? Having a single idiom for accomplishing that need is cleaner IMO, and I no longer miss iif(). -- Ed Leafe ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: I love ternary ifs, don't you?
Ed Leafe wrote: On Nov 18, 2008, at 6:42 PM, Paul McNett wrote: I know I could write it; I wish it were built-in. I know you could write it, too; I was just pointing out that my first instinct in Python was to mimic the way Fox worked. Since then I've come to appreciate that it isn't built-in. What if instead of choosing between two states, you wanted to choose between 3? Or 4? Or 16? Having a single idiom for accomplishing that need is cleaner IMO, and I no longer miss iif(). I guess you are right: using the dict approach would work as a one-liner of any length, which was the whole point of the iif(). And I guess you are right on another thing too: I don't really miss iif() either. I was just trying to contribute to the conversation. :) Paul ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: I love ternary ifs, don't you?
Kind of like play-doh, huh? That was a great article, by the way.
Jeff
Jeff Johnson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
SanDC, Inc.
623-582-0323
Fax 623-869-0675
Phoenix Python User Group - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ed Leafe wrote:
On Nov 18, 2008, at 4:43 PM, Paul McNett wrote:
But yes, I love iif(), and wish Python had it.
def iif(comp, trueVal, falseVal):
return {True: trueVal, False: falseVal}[bool(comp)]
I think that was one of the first Python scripts I ever wrote!
-- Ed Leafe
[excessive quoting removed by server]
___
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
