Issue #7511 has been updated by rits (First Last).


naruse (Yui NARUSE) wrote:
> How about a ? b : true

One can get along without the implication operator, but for better readability / quicker mental parsing, it would be better than the existing alternatives, including ternary.

----------------------------------------
Feature #7511: short-circuiting logical implication operator
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/7511#change-34404

Author: rits (First Last)
Status: Open
Priority: Normal
Assignee: 
Category: 
Target version: 


I find I need logical implication (will use => here) in boolean expressions fairly often

and even though a => b is equivalent to !a || b, this substitute is more difficult to read and make sense of in long expressions




-- 
http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/