Unintuitive If() behaviour

RE: Unintuitive If() behaviour

Mathieu Drouin — Thu, 22 Feb 2024 13:35:46 GMT

a!match seems to handle it better IMO. If you pass it a list, the condition never triggers.

a!localVariables(
  local!test: {},
  a!match(
    value: local!test,
    whenTrue: local!test > 0,
    then: {
      "My First Message",
      "My second Message",
      "My third message"
    },
    default: "My false Message"
  )
)

RE: Unintuitive If() behaviour

Stefan Helzle — Thu, 22 Feb 2024 06:16:57 GMT

I think this is dangerous as the behaviour of an if() with multiple conditions is hard to predict and combined with variable length values lists becomes erratic at best.

April Schuppel if the docs team is updating this, I suggest to include a clear warning about the edge cases and that the if() function clearly is meant to be used with a single condition only.

RE: Unintuitive If() behaviour

April Schuppel — Thu, 22 Feb 2024 02:14:13 GMT

Interesting point - I can bring it up with the docs team!

RE: Unintuitive If() behaviour

deans4069 — Thu, 22 Feb 2024 02:12:09 GMT

Should this be updated since condition can be a list of boolean and not just the data type boolean?

RE: Unintuitive If() behaviour

April Schuppel — Thu, 22 Feb 2024 01:41:21 GMT

Hi deans4069 ,

The if() function docs explain this behavior: "However, if the value parameters have shorter lists than the condition, the index is not maintained. Instead, each item is returned in order (and repeats if necessary)."