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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 10.182.106.12 with SMTP id gq12mr19789792obb.6.1434134626706;
 Fri, 12 Jun 2015 11:43:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.140.101.22 with SMTP id t22mr242767qge.32.1434134626666;
 Fri, 12 Jun 2015 11:43:46 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!h15no2224111igd.0!news-out.google.com!4ni1210qgh.1!nntp.google.com!z60no871538qgd.1!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 11:43:46 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <xbgrg1rqjz4n$.141vkthh9qg38$.dlg@40tude.net>
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=75.99.9.146;
 posting-account=s89PEgoAAABHs2ETFyOrCeTQVQJAfzKq
NNTP-Posting-Host: 75.99.9.146
References: <4f4cd4b1-0a6d-441b-a4f7-98add70e4e1e@googlegroups.com>
 <1p71vf5ckbudu$.1qcb9ot1jpysk.dlg@40tude.net>
 <afb6fe82-1f67-49a8-b4b1-f814a71ba8fd@googlegroups.com>
 <xbgrg1rqjz4n$.141vkthh9qg38$.dlg@40tude.net>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <5e52d05c-62de-439f-8e2f-750ce77e4e47@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Is this a bug in my code or the compiler?
From: marciant@earthlink.net
Injection-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 18:43:46 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: number.nntp.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:193599
Date: 2015-06-12T11:43:46-07:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Friday, June 12, 2015 at 2:11:33 PM UTC-4, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>=20
> The name suggests that short-cut logical operations were considered as a
> syntax sugar to save keystrokes - a replacement for nested IFs. Quickly
> enough it was discovered that in some contexts you cannot have IFs (e.g. =
in
> barriers) and that people disliked nested IFs anyway.
>=20

(nit-picker alert! ;-)

They are called short-circuit not short-cut, short in that normally all par=
ts of a boolean expression are evaluated (even those that would cause an ex=
ception with elements some values).  That was to improve testability: you a=
re normally sure that some part of an expression isn't actually never evalu=
ated with some given test input.  It also can minimize execution time varia=
nce.

I think that the canonical example is something like "if x/=3D0 and then y/=
x=3Dn then ..." but I see what you mean by less nested if's.   But avoiding=
 the nested if's was less about minimizing typing and more about increasing=
 readability.