this post was submitted on 08 Jun 2025
472 points (97.4% liked)

Programmer Humor

36257 readers
1123 users here now

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

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] undefinedValue@programming.dev 6 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Speaking of big cumbersome things with wildly different syntax have you tried a ternary operation in python lately? Omg that thing is ugly. JavaScripts is hard to beat.

uglyTernary = True: if python_syntax == “shit” else: False prettyTernary = javascript_syntax == “pretty” ? true : false

[–] limdaepl@feddit.org 1 points 16 hours 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!“?

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 hour 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" };
[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours 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