I propose a new, more threatening kind of control flow.
do { /* something */ } or else { /* you don't want to find out */ }this is just a menacing try/catch!
It_would_be_a_shame_if(condition)
The better try-catch. More intuitive if you ask me.
It exists, kind of. Python has this construct
for item in iterable: ... else: ...which always puzzles me, since it depends on a break statement execution. I always have to look it up when the else block is executed.
You just made me a offer I can’t refuse. I go now to sleep with the fishes…
do { /* something */ } do hast { /* something */ }do { /* something */ } do hast { /* something */ } do hast mich { /* something */ }
Please God let this be a humorous post that somehow does not also find a way to manage to come true…
I would have bought it if they said ifnot instead, it’s the same number of characters and wouldn’t require a major parser overhaul to support keywords with a ’ in the name.
i mean, “unless” tends to be the usual term for an “if not” keyword in languages that implement such a thing
Which is awful and incredibly confusing. I hate ruby
And Perl
And my axe!
totally agree; just saying that if it’s GOT to be something, that something should probably be unless… unless . . .
I find that you need to choose carefully when to use it. Simple cases tend to be alright. Larger, more complex conditions shouldn’t touch it.
Yeah, to be clear, I don’t like it, I don’t like it one bit:-P.
Reduce exclamation marks!? Great Scott!!! Is there a shortage of punctuation in the future!?
You could have saved two, all you had to do was use the interrobang. You’re a monster.
All known deposits were depleted
I’m struggling to understand if this is true or ifn’t true
I’m just hoping this paves the way to code with Southern dialect
iffun is == true iffun ain't == falseMay I introduce you to the joys of #define and creating your own horrible sub language
That reminds me of an old paper about how to create a compilable C program out of old game ROMs. Decompile to assembly. Implement a bunch of
#definestatements that implement all the ASM statements. Now compile it to a native binary on whatever platform.Won’t likely be faster or more accurate than regular emulation methods, but it’s a neat idea considering that the source code on all this stuff was lost a long time ago.
“Help’s with readability”? You know what else helps? Not using contractions and introducing an unbalanced single quote.
- bdonvr ( @bdonvr@thelemmy.club ) 25•1 year ago
If they’d’nt’ve done that, it’d’ve been better. Agreed.
Aside: rip Tom Scott
This feels racist against Appalachia. We naturally speak with contractions and are commonly referred to as “unbalanced”.
Runs havoc on parsing, too. It’s bad for both humans and robots. I say we ship it.
Why not just ifnot? Same count of characters but an o instead of a possibly problematic single quote.
Yes… how is “reducing exclamation marks” a good thing when you do it by adding a
'(not to be confused with,´,‘or’` …which are all different characters).Does this rely on the assumption that everyone uses a US QWERTY keyboard where
!happens to be slightly more inconvenient than typing'?
ifn't (myNum don't= 3 && myStr ain'tnull'rblankish)I hate seeing colloquial terms like ‘ain’t’ in non-comment (ie. standardized) parts of code
What’s wrong with “else”
It’s not
ifn't
if(condition) {#block never used} else {#actually do a thing}Vs
ifn't(condition) {#actually do a thing}Vs
if!(condition) {#actually do a thing}
vs
if (not condition) {#actually do a thing}
Cannot start a statement with else. One can with ifn’t. There is a new thing where we don’t branch (which is a separate discussion).
Or am I missing the joke…
die unless $keyword == “unless”;
This has to be illegal. I mean, it’s basically suicide incitement (or whatever is the phrase for it)
I shan’t!
;-;
Python already has this.
