Minor refactor in readEmAsmArgs. NFC

[sbc100]

Split out from #19980

[kripken]

This is a ? : nested in another - is there no need for ( ) to avoid ambiguity in parsing..?

[sbc100]

Seems like the nesting works as we expect it to here.

$ cat test.js 
function f(n) {
  return n == 1 ? 'one' :
         n == 2 ? 'two' :
         n == 3 ? 'three' : NaN;
}

console.log(f(1));
console.log(f(2));
console.log(f(3));
$ node test.js 
one
two
three

[kripken]

Thanks for checking, might just be confusing for me personally then... 😄 but seems fine in compiler output if it's unambiguous.