ternary

Why the output of following code is 9.0 and not 9 ? If ternary operator is nothing but short form of if-else branch then why java compiler is promoting int to double ? public class Ternary { public static void main(String args[]) { int a = 5; System.out.println("Value is - " + ((a < 5) ? 9.9 : 9)); } } If ternary operator is nothing but short form of if-else branch then why java compiler is promoting int to double ? A conditional expression has a single type, which both the second and third operands are converted to as necessary. The JLS gives the rules determining the expression type, which

I've an expression of the form shown below :- while (count) { ... ... index = ((count == 20)? 0 : index++); ... ... } Now Ternary operators are sequence points in C but I believe that the sequence point ends at the test part. Is this understanding correct and as such will this statement lead to undefined behaviour ? Right. There's a sequence point after the evaluation of the condition, but the next sequence point is the semicolon terminating the statement. So whenever count != 20 , you have the undefined behaviour index = index++; since index is modified twice without intervening sequence

I'm trying to come up with a way of plotting a ternary heatmap using R. I think ggtern should be able todo the trick, but I don't know how to do a binning function like stat_bin in vanilla ggplot2. Here's What I have so far: require(ggplot2) require(ggtern) require(MASS) require(scales) palette <- c( "#FF9933", "#002C54", "#3375B2", "#CCDDEC", "#BFBFBF", "#000000") sig <- matrix(c(1,2,3,4),2,2) data <- data.frame(mvrnorm(n=10000, rep(2, 2), Sigma)) data$X1 <- data$X1/max(data$X1) data$X2 <- data$X2/max(data$X2) data$X1[which(data$X1<0)] <- runif(length(data$X1[which(data$X1<0)])) data$X2[which

This question already has an answer here: What's the precedence of comma operator inside conditional operator in C++? 3 answers Well, I had a question about comma in ternary operator. Cut the crap, the code is below: void test_comma_in_condition(void) { int ia, ib, ic; ia = ib = ic = 0; bool condition=true; cout<<"Original:"<<endl; cout<<"ia: "<<ia<<endl; cout<<"ib: "<<ib<<endl; condition?(ia=1, ib=2):(ia=11, ib=12); cout<<"After:"<<endl; cout<<"ia: "<<ia<<endl; cout<<"ib: "<<ib<<endl; ia = ib = ic = 0; condition?ia=1, ib=2, ic=3:ib=22,ia=21, ic=23; cout<<"The operation must be bracketed, or

Imagine I have a class Family. It contains a List of Person. Each (class) Person contains a (class) Address. Each (class) Address contains a (class) PostalCode. Any "intermediate" class can be null. So, is there a simple way to get to PostalCode without having to check for null in every step? i.e., is there a way to avoid the following daisy chaining code? I know there's not "native" Java solution, but was hoping if anyone knows of a library or something. (checked Commons & Guava and didn't see anything) if(family != null) { if(family.getPeople() != null) { if(family.people.get(0) != null) {

This question already has an answer here: Why can't we have return in the ternary operator? 4 answers I need to return true or false if an option in a drop down selected. This is my code: var active = sort.attr('selected') ? return true : return false; I get an error that the first return is unexpected. Why? You cannot assign a return statement to a variable. If you want active to be assigned the value true or false , just delete the return s: var active = sort.attr('selected') ? true : false; or maybe better: var active = sort.prop('selected'); since .prop always returns true or false ,

Are there any understanding / maintainability issues that result from code like inVar1 == 0 ? NULL : v.push_back(inVar1); inVar2 == 0 ? NULL : v.push_back(inVar2); and so forth. The possibly confusing idea is using the ternary operator for program flow rather than variable assignment, which is the usual explanation. I haven't seen coding standards at work that address this usage, so while I'm comfortable doing this I'd like to find out if there is a good reason not to. I think it's confusing and a lot harder to read than simply typing; if (inVar != 0) v.push_back(inVar); I had to scan your