What's the cleanest way to run a piece of code if any branch of a cond
statement succeeded, without relying on the return value of the
individual clauses not to be nil?
For example, if I have the following piece of code that says I can
only move left or up
(cond
(= dir :left) (move-left)
(=
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Martin DeMello martindeme...@gmail.com wrote:
What's the cleanest way to run a piece of code if any branch of a cond
statement succeeded, without relying on the return value of the
individual clauses not to be nil?
For example, if I have the following piece of
On Nov 4, 11:49 pm, Baishampayan Ghose b.gh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Nov 5, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Martin DeMello martindeme...@gmail.com
wrote:
What's the cleanest way to run a piece of code if any branch of a cond
statement succeeded, without relying on the return value of the
individual
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
what about
(cond (= dir :left) ((move-left)(:ok)) (= dir :up)
((move-up)(:ok)) :else :nok)
or whatever the exact syntax is
Am 05.11.2011 08:22, schrieb Alan Malloy:
On Nov 4, 11:49 pm, Baishampayan Ghose b.gh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Nov 5,
Assuming that you meant (do (move-left) (:ok)), this is insufficient
except in the rare case where he doesn't care about the return value
of move-left.
On Nov 5, 2:18 am, Dennis Haupt d.haup...@googlemail.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
what about
(cond (= dir
