[fpc-devel] new features and facilities

Mark Morgan Lloyd markMLl.fpc-devel at telemetry.co.uk
Thu Oct 8 20:10:46 CEST 2015

Ralf Quint wrote:
> On 10/8/2015 9:54 AM, Sven Barth wrote:
>> I had the idea to implement inline-if as well. I think the syntax I 
>> selected is derived from Oxygene, but it looks very Pascal and 
>> shouldn't break anything:
>> left := if expr1 then expr2 else expr3;
>> Thereby expr1 returns Boolean and expr2 determines the type of the 
>> whole inline-if, thus expr3 needs to be compatible to expr2.
> Sorry, but that doesn't "look Pascal" at all, and is anything but easily 
> understandable, specially given the possible complexity of expr[1,2,3]...

But at least in this instance there's /always/ an ELSE, so there's no 
risk of apparent ambiguity due to "dangling else": a closing END or FI 
isn't needed.

It's more difficult to argue for inline CASE, particularly since that 
one might have optional ELSE or OTHERWISE.

Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]

More information about the fpc-devel mailing list