Re: Ternary operator patch

[David Kastrup <dak@...>]

Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>>> [I admit, an if-else operator is something I've wanted quite a few
>>> times in the past, and given the extremely small implementation cost,
>>> seems like it's almost a no-brainer...]
>>
>> A child has an extremely small implementation cost as well.  You have to
>> keep the followup costs in mind.
>
> Hmm, given that it arguably could make much code _clearer_, the followup
> costs may actually be less than zero... :)
>
> [Note I'm talking about a simple "if EXPR then EXPR else EXPR", not
> something fancy that allows embedded blocks or whatever.]

Do you really think you can keep children from growing up?

-- 
David Kastrup