Echo JS 0.11.0

<~>
buster 2486 days ago. link 3 points ▲ ▼
Indeed, “chained ternaries” is a better way to refer to them and I will start immediately.

From the article, “People try to use ternary statements as if they’re if statements. That doesn’t work, because ternary expressions are expressions, not statements”.

^ Actually, it does work with a little help from `||` or `&&`, which can and does lead to some logic errors.

Just today I put a PR on module with 500k daily installs, that broke it’s UMD wrapper due to an oversight surely from using “nested ternary statements”:
```
function (global, factory) {
    typeof exports === 'object' && typeof module !== 'undefined'
        ? module.exports = factory(global)
        : typeof define === 'function' && define.amd
        ? define(factory) : null
}
```
^ Muck

Replies

ericelliott 2485 days ago. link 4 points ▲ ▼
Yeah, that defeats the point of ternary expressions.

This should use if statements instead, to clarify the mutation intent.

If you're not capturing/returning the value of a ternary expression, you're missing the point of ternaries.
bigopon 2486 days ago. link 1 point ▲ ▼
couldnt spot anything  wrong. why did it break ?
buster 2486 days ago. link 1 point ▲ ▼
I included the snippet only to highlight how, in the real world, ternaries are used to execute statements rather than simply express values. FWIW, in this case, the final `null` needs to be replaced with `factory(global)` to work as expected.