This ( »using ternaries« ) is in principle a good idea (I just posted my example and saw yours just now).
But have in mind that every branch adds more reading complexity.
If you use a ternary as a short form for whenthen it's from my POV okay - you are dealing with a binary outcome.
But when you nesting ternaries, you end up with
whenthenwhenthen
which is harder to digest - which I tried to visualize by verbalizing it this way ;)
As a developer, I want to read as less code as necessary to understand what is going on. So your solution optimizes for that.
OTOH as a developer, I want to reason as less as possible as what a code is doing in case it has bugs. Taking that into account, I find your solution less favourable.
P.S.:
Or to contrast it with my own solution: I choose a similar approach like yours but added the guardingif-clause as a visual indicator of This is the uninteresting part. Nothing to see here. And the evalutation of the result which is from its nature a binary result (unless we are maybe at the quantum level) we have or we have not knowledge of a personToLookFor. And this binary result is explicitely written down as returning the result with the help of ternaries.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
This ( »using ternaries« ) is in principle a good idea (I just posted my example and saw yours just now).
But have in mind that every branch adds more reading complexity.
If you use a ternary as a short form for when then it's from my POV okay - you are dealing with a binary outcome.
But when you nesting ternaries, you end up with
when then when then
which is harder to digest - which I tried to visualize by verbalizing it this way ;)
As a developer, I want to read as less code as necessary to understand what is going on. So your solution optimizes for that.
OTOH as a developer, I want to reason as less as possible as what a code is doing in case it has bugs. Taking that into account, I find your solution less favourable.
P.S.:
Or to contrast it with my own solution: I choose a similar approach like yours but added the guarding
if-clauseas a visual indicator of This is the uninteresting part. Nothing to see here. And the evalutation of the result which is from its nature a binary result (unless we are maybe at the quantum level) we have or we have not knowledge of apersonToLookFor. And this binary result is explicitely written down as returning the result with the help of ternaries.