[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: Ternary operator patch
- From: Jorge <xxopxe@...>
- Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 23:58:06 -0300
On Wed, 2010-09-15 at 23:22 +0000, Tom N Harris wrote:
> The real question is, if Lua doesn't get a ternary operator, what will
> be more of a problem? Responding to requests for a ternary operator on
> the list, or correcting people who type "LUA"?
I can confidently answer the later, but the former is boggling my mind
and nobody has asked it for real yet.
- References:
- Re: Ternary operator patch, Henk Boom
- Re: Ternary operator patch, steve donovan
- Re: Ternary operator patch, Geoff Leyland
- Re: Ternary operator patch, steve donovan
- Re: Ternary operator patch, Miles Bader
- Re: Ternary operator patch, David Kastrup
- Re: Ternary operator patch, Miles Bader
- Re: Ternary operator patch, David Kastrup
- Re: Ternary operator patch, Jonathan Castello
- Re: Ternary operator patch, Roberto Ierusalimschy
- Re: Ternary operator patch, Enrico Tassi
- Re: Ternary operator patch, Doug Rogers
- Re: Ternary operator patch, Ryota Hirose
- Re: Ternary operator patch, Ryota Hirose
- Re: Ternary operator patch, Tom N Harris
