On: PEP 572: Python assignment expressions has been ac...

[kstrauser]

> Add to that the brokenness of if...else

Could you elaborate on that?

[aib → kstrauser]

> > Add to that the brokenness of if...else

> Could you elaborate on that?

It's a very opinionated statement on my part. `if COND then TRUE-CASE else FALSE-CASE` is the correct form to use, in my opinion. Python uses `TRUE-CASE if COND else FALSE-CASE`.

[jb1991 → aib]

Conventional if statements in Python do use your preferred form of `if COND then TRUE-CASE else FALSE-CASE`.

What you are talking about is a different kind of expression, similar to a ternary operator. It is not the same as if...else

[aib → jb1991]

The reason it's not the same as if...else is that it's freaking backwards :D

[jb1991 → aib]

You said:

> Python uses `TRUE-CASE if COND else FALSE-CASE`.

And this is wrong -- this is not how Python if statements work.

[aib → jb1991]

> > Python uses `TRUE-CASE if COND else FALSE-CASE`.

> And this is wrong -- this is not how Python if statements work.

Huh? Didn't you yourself say I was not talking about if statements:

> What you are talking about is a different kind of expression, similar to a ternary operator. It is not the same as if...else

In any case, I'm talking about the case that goes `TRUE-CASE if COND else FALSE-CASE`, as can be deduced from my typing `TRUE-CASE if COND else FALSE-CASE`.