Add rule ES.xx: Use the ternary operator '?' for conditional initialization

[peno2]

I suggest to add a rule that explicitly mentions the use of the ternary operator '?', since using '?' in many cases can make the code a lot simpler compared to using a lambda expression or some initialisation function.
.
.
.
Use the ternary operator '?' for conditional initialization, in particular when the condition is simple enough to not justify the added complexity of using a lambda expression (ES.28). An important benefit of fully initializing an object is that it can be const-declared if so desired (see also ES.25).

Example
Here is an example that is often considered to demonstrate the difficulty to initialize objects direcltly at declaration.

widget w1;    // "widget" a type that's expensive to initialize, possibly a large POD
widget w2;

if (cond) {  // bad: w1 and w2 are initialized "late"
    w1 = f1();
    w2 = f2();
}
else {
    w1 = f3();
    w2 = f4();
}

Using the ternary operator '?' this can be rewritten to initialize both w1 and w2 at the time of declaration:

// good, properly initialized right away, may also be const now, if so desired
const widget w1 = cond ? f1(): f3();
const widget w2 = cond ? f2(): f4();

Or, as a matter of style, if this communicates the intent better, initialize both 'w1' and 'w2' in one single statement:

using std::pair;
const auto [w1,  w2]  = cond ?  pair{f1(), f2()}:  pair{f3(), f4()};    // C++17

.
.
.
Now, if the above suggestion is accepted some questions arises. How shall we handle ES.20 and ES.21 which both overlaps with the suggested rule to some extent?