[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: |
Mon, 12 Feb 2007 21:37:19 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/23.0.51 (gnu/linux) |
"Stuart D. Herring" <address@hidden> writes:
>> The `case' macro already allows `otherwise'. That's a
>> pretty compelling reason to allow it in `cond' as well.
>> (Yes, I know `case' is in the `cl' library, but lots of
>> people use that library --- at least its macros.)
>
> The `case' macro allows it because t is already a special case there (case
> clauses are not conditions), and so giving it an unusual name reduces the
> surprise. In `cond', each clause by definition begins with an expression
> evaluated as a condition. Any problems whatsoever in immediately and
> fully understanding the function of t in such a circumstance are so
> fundamental that they -should- be called out by the syntax and addressed
> rather than allowed to continue by an English-like special case.
That is a straw man. Nobody is confused about what `t'
means in a `cond' clause and nobody would be if `otherwise'
were introduced. Come on, this is basic stuff.
> (Imagine what would happen if someone, perhaps to shush
> the byte-compiler, set `otherwise' to nil, and how much
> worse if the person debugging thought that `case' treated
> that symbol specially!)
Yes, wouldn't that be a crazy idea!
Now imagine what would happen if 1 + 5 were equal to 12.
That's right. Mixing juice would get you twice as much.
There's no reason why `otherwise' couldn't be a special case
in the `cond' macro, as it is in `case'.
> I am sure that not everyone agrees with my thoughts on the matter, and
> that there are good arguments against them, but it is my general
> contention that programmers would do well spending more time learning
> their languages and tools and less time divising clever tricks in an
> attempt to make such learning unnecessary for others. The tricks
> typically succeed in preventing the learning but not in transcending it.
I don't aim to make learning unnecessary for others.
The simple and embarrasing truth is that I think `otherwise'
looks pretty. It makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside.
Everyone else disagrees. I shut up. End of thread.
--
Daniel Brockman <address@hidden>
- Re: constant `e', (continued)
- 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
- Re: constant `e', Edward O'Connor, 2007/02/10
- Re: constant `e', Stuart D. Herring, 2007/02/12
- Re: constant `e',
Daniel Brockman <=
- Re: constant `e', David Kastrup, 2007/02/12
Re: constant `e', Richard Stallman, 2007/02/10
Re: constant `e', Alan Mackenzie, 2007/02/10
- Re: constant `e', Jason Rumney, 2007/02/10
- Re: constant `e', Juanma Barranquero, 2007/02/10
- Re: constant `e', Stefan Monnier, 2007/02/10
- Re: constant `e', David Hansen, 2007/02/10
- RE: constant `e', Drew Adams, 2007/02/10