Re: short-circuit control forms

[Wes Groleau <wwgrol@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com>]

> - Readers of code reasonably assume that things are the way they are for a
> reason.  I don't think "we thought short circuit forms were faster" counts
> as a good reason, and so I would expect that most readers would get the
> impression that there is some other reason why it must be that way.  If it's
> not really true, then the intent is obscured and the understanding process
> is slowed down.

This is similar to the rationale for our standards/guidelines.
Since the RM, AQS, and most Ada textbooks say that the purpose
of a short-circuit is to avoid an exception in the second test,
using the form without comment is telling future readers that
this situation exists.  If that message is not true....

And, as others have pointed out.... anyone remember who
said (not an exact quote):

   More computing sins have been committed in the name
   of efficiency (without actually acheiving it) ..."

-- 
Wes Groleau
http://freepages.rootsweb.com/~wgroleau