## DEV Community is a community of 637,088 amazing developers

We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.

# Easy refactor ternary conditions to if else

Have you ever had a pain on understanding ternary conditions put in the code by others colleagues that have left the project?

Well, if you think understanding a simple ternary it's easy for you, look at the following example:

``````
const [a1, a2, a3] = [true, 3, true];

const a4 = 0;
const [a5, a6, a7] = [false, 2, false];

const result = a1 ? a4 : a2 ? a4 : a5 ? a6 : a7 ? a4 :
a5 ? a6 : a7 ? a4 : a5 ? a6 : a7 ? a4 : a5 ? a6 : a7;

console.log(result);

``````

What will be the value of `result`?
.............
...........
.........
.......
.....
...
..
.
R: `0`

Now imagine that we have a lot more expressions and not just numbers and booleans. Yeah, not the best day of changing something in the old codebase.

But there is a package that auto refactors to an `IIFE(Immediately Invoked Function Expression)` easy and more readable.

Its a babel plugin wrote a while ago

Now, after using ternary to if else we get:

``````var a = function () {
if (a1) {
return a4;
}

return function () {
if (a2) {
return a4;
}

return function () {
if (a5) {
return a6;
}

return function () {
if (a7) {
return a4;
}

return function () {
if (a5) {
return a6;
}

return function () {
if (a7) {
return a4;
}

return function () {
if (a5) {
return a6;
}

return function () {
if (a7) {
return a4;
}

return function () {
if (a5) {
return a6;
}

return a7;
}();
}();
}();
}();
}();
}();
}();
}();
}();
``````

Enjoy and keep on coding!

## Discussion (4)

SavagePixie • Edited

The ternary could have been more readable if each part of the expression had its own line, but other than that, it's not particularly difficult to read: is thus truthy? Then do this, else is the next element truthy? Then do this, else...

I honestly fail to see how a function with so many nested returns is more readable. I could see a case for a bunch of `else if` statements, if one is not used to reading ternaries. But this function within a function within a function just seems more complicated to read to me.

danielpdev

For me, converting the ternary expression to a function within a function was far more readable.
I had multiple condition for every nested ternary expression and it was hell.

Think about if you have to add some code for one of the nested conditions, for me it's just more easier to have it like that.

It's also not mandatory to leave it like that, I find it easy to refactor the function and not a nested ternary that is on the same line.

Ben Sinclair

The "before" code made me raise my eyebrows, because I can't imagine anyone creating anything like that by hand. It's the sort of thing that would come out of a code minifier, not out of a human brain.

Then I looked at the "after" code and I think it's worse.

This is a great example of where splitting it up into nicer variable names and keeping each `if` separate would be better:

``````
let bestCarnivalRide = null;

if (mySistersHeight > 172) {
bestCarnivalRide = 'rollercoaster';

if (mySistersFears.indexOf('spiders') > -1) {
bestCarnivalRide ='house-of-horrors';
}

// etc.
``````
danielpdev

The code provided was just an example and not real code in production.

The real problem I had was with a nested ternary written in a string and then passed to `eval`. It had a real long nested conditions and babel plugin helped me refactored that code.

I agree with you, no code like that should be in a production application.