# I am the Watcher. I am your guide through this vast new twtiverse.
# 
# Usage:
#     https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/users              View list of users and latest twt date.
#     https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/twt                View all twts.
#     https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/mentions?uri=:uri  View all mentions for uri.
#     https://watcher.sour.is/api/plain/conv/:hash         View all twts for a conversation subject.
# 
# Options:
#     uri     Filter to show a specific users twts.
#     offset  Start index for quey.
#     limit   Count of items to return (going back in time).
# 
# twt range = 1 9
# self = https://watcher.sour.is/conv/4pqlhiq
My take on the discussion to introduce an `?` operator in Go πŸ‘ˆ No. For so many reasons.
My take on the discussion to introduce an `?` operator in Go πŸ‘ˆ No. For so many reasons.
@prologic I don't like it either. Too much magic, that only works in certain cases.
@lyse one time i saw that operator when working with ruby on rails and i was so confused by it that i got stuck on the same code involving it for 9 hours straight
@lyse one time i saw that operator when working with ruby on rails and i was so confused by it that i got stuck on the same code involving it for 9 hours straight
@kat You mean the ? as suffix for boolean returning functions or as ternary operator (condition ? true_value : false_value)?

Interestingly, I just had to look up the first case. I was under the wrong impression that the question mark at the end would be some shortcut for chained function or method calls that handles nil return values in a graceful way without actually dereferencing and thus crashing. I probably never wrote more than 30Β lines of Ruby in my entire life. Must have been some other language.
@lyse Ita a terrible operator that makes code hard
Yo read as @kat difhtidu points out πŸ˜†
@lyse Ita a terrible operator that makes code hard
Yo read as @kat difhtidu points out πŸ˜†
@prologic Which one? I don't mind the ternary operator at all. In fact, I often find myself missing it in Go. I don't find the two alternatives particularly elegant:

foo := "eggs"
if bar {
foo = "spam"
}

Or:

var foo string
if bar {
foo = "spam"
} else {
foo = "eggs"
}

To my eye, this just would look a lot nicer:

foo := bar ? "spam" : "eggs"

Or at least as the Pythons do it:

foo = "spam" if bar else "eggs"

The ternary operator especially shines with relatively short expressions.