GNU bug report logs -
#67669
29.1; Drop text suggesting using `and' to replace `if'
Previous Next
Reported by: Xiyue Deng <manphiz <at> gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2023 21:48:01 UTC
Severity: normal
Found in version 29.1
Done: Xiyue Deng <manphiz <at> gmail.com>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
Full log
Message #49 received at 67669 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
>> From: Xiyue Deng <manphiz <at> gmail.com>
>> Cc: 67669-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2023 12:37:58 -0800
>>
>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
>>
>> >> I was referring to whether we care about and use the result of the
>> >> statement/function call. In `and' we do, in `if' we don't and we just
>> >> use the side effect.
>> >
>> > But that's not true. 'if' does return a value, and we do use it.
>> > Consider this random example:
>> >
>> > (defsubst posn-area (position)
>> > [...]
>> > (let ((area (if (consp (nth 1 position))
>> > (car (nth 1 position))
>> > (nth 1 position))))
>> > (and (symbolp area) area)))
>> >
>> > Here we bind 'area' to the value returned by 'if'.
>>
>> Well if we use `if' with else then yes.
>
> No. When 'if' has no 'else' clause, and the test fails, 'if' returns
> nil. This is used in many places in our code. Like this:
>
> (let (baz)
> (setq foo (concat "bar" (if (stringp baz) baz))))
> => "bar"
>
> Here 'if' returns nil, and we use the feature of 'concat' to ignore
> nil arguments.
Ah I see. So it looks like in Elisp `and' and `if' are actually used
interchangeably. This was not very obvious at first for me who's more
familiar with other imperative languages. TIL. Thanks!
--
Xiyue Deng
This bug report was last modified 1 year and 224 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.