trost@reed.UUCP (Bill Trost) (09/08/86)
All these various examples make it quite obvious that you can do anything without using ?:. The question is, why would you want to? The construct exists as a programmer's convenience. I also suspect (but am uncertain) that the use of ?: is more effecient in terms of code size and speed.
wong@rtech.UUCP (J. Wong) (09/08/86)
In article <4064@reed.UUCP> trost@reed.UUCP (Bill Trost) writes: > > ... I also suspect (but am uncertain) >that the use of ?: is more effecient in terms of code size and speed. No, in most cases ?: is less efficient. It does result is less source code, however (and I feel results in more readable code, as long as you don't nest them.) -- J. Wong ucbvax!mtxinu!rtech!wong **************************************************************** You start a conversation, you can't even finish it. You're talking alot, but you're not saying anything. When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed. Say something once, why say it again. - David Byrne