From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,db5c6b2ef47d4b9e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-06-21 08:02:52 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!newsfeed.mathworks.com!cyclone.swbell.net!bos-service1.ext.raytheon.com!bos-service2.ext.raytheon.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3B320C99.252A39CF@ftw.rsc.raytheon.com> From: Wes Groleau X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en,es,fr,pt MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: short-circuit control forms References: <3B30F836.D700DAA3@raytheon.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 10:02:49 -0500 NNTP-Posting-Host: 151.168.144.162 X-Complaints-To: news@ext.ray.com X-Trace: bos-service2.ext.raytheon.com 993135772 151.168.144.162 (Thu, 21 Jun 2001 11:02:52 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 11:02:52 EDT Organization: Raytheon Company Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:8973 Date: 2001-06-21T10:02:49-05:00 List-Id: > - 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