[J3] [EXTERNAL] Re: Syntax of conditional expressions

[Damian Rouson]

I voted for the verbose form and the arrow version of the concise form.  If
I recall correctly, those two options were tied. If another vote is held
(which I'm not necessarily recommending as I would be fine with the
proposed idea of Data  deciding), I would simply vote for the arrow version
of the concise form based on this email discussion.  Hopefully that would
break the tie.

Damian

On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 5:48 AM Clune, Thomas L. (GSFC-6101) via J3 <
j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org> wrote:

> I did not forget that case.   And, like you, it remains my main
> motivation.   It was just harder to construct something meaningful on the
> fly.   But same argument:   with 3 optional arguments involved, the full
> statement is unlikely to fit in 72 characters in real world examples
> regardless of concise form.
>
>
>
> Note:   I’m not at all opposed to concise form, and indeed slightly prefer
> it.  _*Not*_ because of its brevity, at least not directly.   Rather
> because I find the verbose form distracts from the intent whereas the
> concise form has the necessary visual trigges to my mind.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *J3 <j3-bounces at mailman.j3-fortran.org> on behalf of j3 <
> j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>
> *Reply-To: *j3 <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>
> *Date: *Tuesday, June 29, 2021 at 6:30 PM
> *To: *j3 <j3 at mailman.j3-fortran.org>
> *Cc: *Van Snyder <van.snyder at sbcglobal.net>
> *Subject: *Re: [J3] [EXTERNAL] Re: Syntax of conditional expressions
>
>
>
> On Tue, 2021-06-29 at 19:28 +0000, Clune, Thomas L. (GSFC-6101) via J3
> wrote:
>
> I chose some random variables and conditions from my own code  in a nested
> block,  and grant me that we’re doing the nontrivial case where there is at
> least one else:
>
>
>
> myVariable = ( has_ungrid -> AttributeGet(‘UNGRIDDED_DIMS’:
>  default_provided -> default : gridded_default )
>
>
>
>
>
> Don't lose track of the other functionality desired for conditional
> expressions: Computing whether an actual argument is present.
>
>
>
> With it, in a reference to a procedure that has N optional arguments, you
> have N conditional expression arguments.
>
>
>
> Without it, you have a nested IF THEN ELSE IF ... ELSE END IF construct
> with 2**N blocks.
>
>
>
> Please don't kill the feature because you don't like the syntax. We aready
> agreed on requirements. In our process, syntax comes AFTER requirements,
> not before.
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/attachments/20210630/939f96b3/attachment-0001.htm>