Patrick McCarty <pnor...@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 11:24 PM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >> Patrick McCarty <pnor...@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> On 2009-11-16, David Kastrup wrote: >>>> >>>> It still suffers from not doing short-circuit evaluation. For >>>> readability and efficiency, I'd really prefer replacing >>>> '(apply functional-or' with '(any' >>> >>> It looks like Neil removed the "is-harmonic" binding from this >>> procedure a couple of days ago, since it was unused. >>> >>> So, nothing really needs to be changed after all. :-) >> >> Still I feel more comfortable with this patch in place. I am not >> entirely sure whether it would not be simpler to just scratch both >> functional-or and functional-and altogether since they are basically >> only useful in situations where one would better use a different mapping >> function with short-circuit evaluation. > > Oh, I didn't realize you wanted to change the `functional-or' itself. > I don't think we should remove the two procedures entirely, because > users might have written Scheme extension code that uses them.
They couldn't. Wrong namespace. lilypond -e '(functional-or 1)' GNU LilyPond 2.13.8 <unnamed port>:1:8: In expression (functional-or 1): <unnamed port>:1:8: Unbound variable: functional-or > Can you send a formal patch so I can see how you want these procedures > implemented? I really don't want to have them implemented at all since you are better off using a different mapping function that uses short-circuit evaluation rather than mapping over functional-or. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel