News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Sizeof(char) is 1 by rix0r on Monday September 06, 2010 @05:29AM (#1666323)
Which is actually pretty useful and readable, imho (if formatted correctly):

  return a ? b :
         c ? d :
         e ? f :
         g;
Side note: this does not work in PHP, as the operator is left-associative instead of right-associative there. The above in PHP would be evaluated as:

  return ((a ? b : c) ? d : e) ? f : g;
Which is almost never what you want. I can't even format this properly to convey intent.
Re:Sizeof(char) is 1 by wlievens on Monday September 06, 2010 @06:13AM (#1666378)
The only sane thing is to use if statements, imho. No ninja cowboy engineer nonsense.
Re:Sizeof(char) is 1 by pbiggar on Monday September 06, 2010 @08:02AM (#1666485)
Correct bracketing would be plenty in this case. If-statements sometimes (not always) make code much less readable than ternary operations.
Re:Sizeof(char) is 1 by Ralith on Monday September 06, 2010 @02:42PM (#1667157)
This is why more languages should adopt the every-form-returns-a-value paradigm.
Re:Sizeof(char) is 1 by sukuriant on Monday September 06, 2010 @06:49AM (#1666416)
Sometimes, if-statements unnecessarily add lines, and the lines become harder to read.

I would say it's a case-by-case statement. Well, okay, more specifically, I would say that the use of a single ternary if is a case-by-case statement.

Re:Sizeof(char) is 1 by wlievens on Tuesday September 07, 2010 @03:58AM (#1668366)
Absolutely. I use ternary if when appropriate. But nesting ternary ifs is horrible, and nesting ternary ifs while discarding parentheses is malevolent.