[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: constant `e'
From: |
Daniel Brockman |
Subject: |
Re: constant `e' |
Date: |
Sat, 10 Feb 2007 19:29:08 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/23.0.51 (gnu/linux) |
Alan,
>> The concept of `non-nil' is very basic to me, so I do not have to
>> filter anything out of `(not (null ...))', because it is already
>> phrased the way I think about it.
>
> The concept of `non-nil' is so basic to me that I don't
> see any need to express it explicitly. ;-)
That might actually be it. :-)
> What gets my goat up is when natural idiomatic C,
> something like this:
>
> while (i--)
> <statement>
>
> has to be recoded [...]
Yes, I agree. That is completely stupid --- I think
the idiomatic style both looks better and is clearer.
> However, I rarely change anything "long-winded" in anybody else's code.
> It creates bad feeling for no objective benefit.
So maybe it's a good thing we don't have `otherwise'.
Having just one standard way avoids that bad feeling.
--
Daniel Brockman <address@hidden>
- Re: constant `e', (continued)
Re: constant `e', Daniel Brockman, 2007/02/10
Re: constant `e', Stuart D. Herring, 2007/02/12
Re: constant `e', Daniel Brockman, 2007/02/12
Re: constant `e', David Kastrup, 2007/02/10
Re: constant `e', Daniel Brockman, 2007/02/10
Re: constant `e', Stuart D. Herring, 2007/02/12
Re: constant `e', Stefan Monnier, 2007/02/10
Re: constant `e', Daniel Brockman, 2007/02/10
Re: constant `e', Stefan Monnier, 2007/02/10
Re: constant `e', David Kastrup, 2007/02/11
Re: constant `e', Daniel Brockman, 2007/02/11