Re: bad-idea-p?
- From: tar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Thomas A. Russ)
- Date: 04 Jan 2007 17:55:42 -0800
Ken Tilton <kentilton@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
They got this one wrong, didn't they? That should be bad-ideap. Just
goes to show how fine the line between clever and stupid. Was there some
concept of "hyphen momentum"?!
Or maybe it should be bad-idea-p but also zero-p. yeah, probably better
to delineate. What is not open to question is the need for consistency.
Actually, according to the standard convention, the didn't get it wrong
at all. It should be bad-idea-p after all, along with zerop.
The short form of the convention is that single word identifiers get "p"
and multi-word identifiers get "-p". Adding the suffix never turns a
single-word identifier into a multi-word identifier.
--
Thomas A. Russ, USC/Information Sciences Institute
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: bad-idea-p?
- From: Ken Tilton
- Re: bad-idea-p?
- References:
- bad-idea-p?
- From: Ken Tilton
- bad-idea-p?
- Prev by Date: Re: I'd spend a week evaluating, but I would rather waste your time: LW vs. ACL Prolog vs Norvig vs?
- Next by Date: Re: (* 2.4 3) => 7.2000003 WTF?! Let's Fix Lisp! Noob Programming Challenge
- Previous by thread: Re: bad-idea-p?
- Next by thread: Re: bad-idea-p?
- Index(es):