Re: One last chapter to review! Last chance! One-day only!
From: David Steuber (david_at_david-steuber.com)
Date: 03/08/05
- Next message: Rich: "Re: Confusing bug while examining function parameters"
- Previous message: David Steuber: "Productivity With Lisp (was Re: I get it)"
- In reply to: Martin Rydstr|m: "Re: One last chapter to review! Last chance! One-day only!"
- Next in thread: Trent Buck: "Re: One last chapter to review! Last chance! One-day only!"
- Reply: Trent Buck: "Re: One last chapter to review! Last chance! One-day only!"
- Reply: Kent M Pitman: "Re: One last chapter to review! Last chance! One-day only!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 08 Mar 2005 03:12:26 -0500
rydis (Martin Rydstr|m) @CD.Chalmers.SE writes:
> > What strikes as perverse is to write code that depends upon the
> > order of argument evaluation.
>
> Not when that order is specified (in the language or the
> implementation). Why would it be?
I was sort of wondering the same thing. Isn't something like:
(if (foo) (bar) (baz))
rather dependent on the order of evaluation?
Although I can see where you might be standing on shaky ground if you
are doing foo bar baz for side effects in something like:
(and (foo) (bar) (baz))
But even that can be perfectly fine.
-- An ideal world is left as an excercise to the reader. --- Paul Graham, On Lisp 8.1
- Next message: Rich: "Re: Confusing bug while examining function parameters"
- Previous message: David Steuber: "Productivity With Lisp (was Re: I get it)"
- In reply to: Martin Rydstr|m: "Re: One last chapter to review! Last chance! One-day only!"
- Next in thread: Trent Buck: "Re: One last chapter to review! Last chance! One-day only!"
- Reply: Trent Buck: "Re: One last chapter to review! Last chance! One-day only!"
- Reply: Kent M Pitman: "Re: One last chapter to review! Last chance! One-day only!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|