Format false branch of ternary operation

[saschanaz]

This PR includes #4757 (#4757 is now merged 👍)

Fixes #3676.

Current:

var v =
    0 ? 1 :
        2 ? 3 :
            4;

Fixed:

var v =
    0 ? 1 :
    2 ? 3 :
    4;

[DanielRosenwasser]

Sorry this didn't get looked at @saschanaz. @vladima @mhegazy should this change have been behind a flag? My feeling is that some people might want cascading ternaries.

[basarat]

👍 from me. Just today:

As soon as a branch has a sub branch its better to move to anything other than a ternary (generally a new function containing a switch with cases having a return) so nesting is not a use case I have 🌹

[mhegazy]

sorry for the super late response. doing a quick poll, this seems a fairly subjective issue. some like their ternaries cascading, others like them on the same level. this calls for a new formatting option :)
so let's add a new option and condition the indentation on this option.

[saschanaz]

Okay, that's fine 👍

[saschanaz]

What's wrong with the Linter? :/

[saschanaz]

Opened #13006 for linter error.

[saschanaz]

Just a note: the new option is now added :D

[saschanaz]

Rebased.

[mhegazy]

just the change to server\protocol.ts and we should be good to go. sorry for the looooooong delay.

[saschanaz]

Renamed the option name from indentInsideTernaryOperator to indentConditionalExpressionFalseBranch, to match how existing TS codes call it.

PS: Why can't I add 😄 to the PR approval 🤔

[typescript-bot]

Thanks for your contribution. This PR has not been updated in a while and cannot be automatically merged at the time being. For housekeeping purposes we are closing stale PRs. If you'd still like to continue working on this PR, please leave a message and one of the maintainers can reopen it.