home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme
- Path: sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!data.nas.nasa.gov!data!hultquis
- From: hultquis@wk206.nas.nasa.gov (Jeff P. M. Hultquist)
- Subject: Re: applying or
- In-Reply-To: pk@cs.tut.fi's message of 28 Dec 92 10:06:20
- References: <BztJDI.1J1@malihh.hanse.de> <BztyDu.KDE@cs.psu.edu>
- <1hg6ofINN7ev@agate.berkeley.edu>
- <PK.92Dec28100620@talitiainen.cs.tut.fi>
- Sender: news@nas.nasa.gov (News Administrator)
- Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, CA USA
- Date: 28 Dec 92 10:23:45
- Message-ID: <HULTQUIS.92Dec28102345@wk206.nas.nasa.gov>
- Reply-To: hultquis@nas.nasa.gov
- Lines: 25
-
- In article <PK.92Dec28100620@talitiainen.cs.tut.fi> pk@cs.tut.fi (Kellom{ki Pertti) writes:
-
-
- > > Of course, you *could* do this sort of computation even if
- > > AND and OR were ordinary procedures, by avoiding AND and OR
- > > and using IF instead in such cases. But this way is deemed
- > > more aesthetically pleasing.
- >
- > I've never liked the way AND and OR are defined. I don't claim that
- > they are not convinient, I'm just not very fond of control structures
- > posing themselves as logic operators to the unwary.
-
- I agree. These short-circuiting special-forms *are* quite
- useful, but the names which have been chosen for these *is*
- often confusing "to the unwary".
-
- When explaining this problem to others, I like to point
- out that, unlike many of the predicate functions, AND and
- OR do not have a trailing question mark. Functions which
- do what the original poster wanted might well be called
- EVERY? and ANY?.
-
- --
- Jeff Hultquist hultquis@nas.nasa.gov
- NASA - Ames Research Center (415) 604-4970
-