No.

In fact, nearly 20 years ago PEP 308 ("Conditional Expressions") was made so people wouldn't need to resort to this sort of syntax - https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0308/ .

Quoting from the Python FAQ from 2.6 at https://web.archive.org/web/20151030070641if_/https://docs.p... :

> In many cases you can mimic a ? b : c with a and b or c, but there’s a flaw: if b is zero (or empty, or None – anything that tests false) then c will be selected instead. In many cases you can prove by looking at the code that this can’t happen (e.g. because b is a constant or has a type that can never be false), but in general this can be a problem.

> Tim Peters (who wishes it was Steve Majewski) suggested the following solution: (a and [b] or [c])[0].

I have seen it a lot of code over the years, sometimes referred to as "shorthand ternary" or the "and-or-trick". In Python and/or do not return a boolean, but one of its input arguments. So I am going to say it is official syntax, but I don't know to what extent it's encouraged

It saves a character in code golf, but as others have pointed out, it's unsafe.

    a if b else c #+1 byte
    a and b or c  #buggy
    (c,b)[not a]  #ok in general
    a and 1or c   #-1 byte if b is a constant
    (b,c)[a]      #-4 byte if a is boolean