In the given example I’d probably use a switch / match expression, but ternaries are usually more flexible than switches and I don’t think it’s an issue to write a nested ternary instead of if else statements.
Which is bad for readability because the reader need to manually compute it to see whether it’s doing simple switching or not. Also it adds the question of “Why did the author use a nested ternary instead of a switch? Was it meant to do more but it got left out unintentionally?”
To be fair: If you are chaining ternary expressions, you deserve to suffer whatever pain the language happens to inflict upon you tenfold.
Why?
It’s perfectly readable.
It is sort of readable. A switch is “perfectly” readable for switching.
Match is even better, short and sweet.
Ternary expressions aren’t switches though
Which is exactly why you shouldn’t be using them in a situation that clearly calls for a switch.
In the given example I’d probably use a switch / match expression, but ternaries are usually more flexible than switches and I don’t think it’s an issue to write a nested ternary instead of if else statements.
Which is bad for readability because the reader need to manually compute it to see whether it’s doing simple switching or not. Also it adds the question of “Why did the author use a nested ternary instead of a switch? Was it meant to do more but it got left out unintentionally?”