Hi John
Yes...you're right...I was using an (if (or (stop test 1) (stop test 2))
(do nothing) (do all the stuff)
but your "unless" is much more direct.
Hi Alex
Yes I like that a lot!
Thank you both for your further help.
Best Regards
Dean
On 19 January 2017 at 17:02, Alexander Burger wrote:
> On
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 05:50:00PM +0100, Alexander Burger wrote:
> Note that (setq Do_it NIL) is (off Do_it), and you could also use an 'or' for
> the two equal consequences. Then the above becomes:
>
>(setq
> Pg_bks 7
> Lns_from_top 6
> Do_it T )
>(case 2
> (1 (pr
Hi Dean,
> (setq Pg_bks 7)
> (setq Lns_from_top 6)
> (setq Do_it T)
> (case 2
>(1 (prinl "in 1"))
>(2
> (if (> 2 Pg_blks) (setq Do_it NIL))
> (if (> 6 Lns_from_top) (setq Do_it NIL))
> (if (Do_it) (prinl "yes doing a"))
> (if (Do_it) (prinl "yes doing b"))
>
I think 'unless' with 'or' might be what you're looking for.
(unless
(or
(cond1 ...)
(cond2 ...)
(cond3 ...))
(call1 ...)
(call2 ...))
'or' is short-circuited, so the conditions will be evaluated in order. If
one of the conditions is true, NIL will be returned. All the calls wil
Hi Alex
Thank you for confirming no return and the alternative.
Best Regards
Dean
On 19 January 2017 at 14:44, Alexander Burger wrote:
> Hi Dean,
>
> > I'd like to do this but am not sure if it's possible
> >
> > ( case
> >#= start of match clause
> >(
> >(prog
> >
Hi Dean,
> I'd like to do this but am not sure if it's possible
>
> ( case
>#= start of match clause
>(
>(prog
>(if () (EXIT THIS MATCH CLAUSE/PROG))
>(otherwise you'll execute this statement)
>)
> )
> #= end of match clause
>
Ok here we are...
This is the nearest I can get in PL with my limited familarity i.e. a very
flat structure
(setq Pg_bks 7)
(setq Lns_from_top 6)
(setq Do_it T)
(case 2
(1 (prinl "in 1"))
(2
(if (> 2 Pg_blks) (setq Do_it NIL))
(if (> 6 Lns_from_top) (setq Do_it NIL))
(
Thank you very much Joe.,,,I see what you mean and don't think I've been
clear enough.
I'll try and put a better example together.
It might be because of Lisps "everything returns a value" my constructs
aren't compatible.
We'll seeback soon.
On 19 January 2017 at 13:13, Joe Bogner wrote:
> d
dean, I would use unless.
See this control structure below as an alternative to the prog/if
: (setq Test1 1)
-> 1
: (case Test1 (1 (unless Test2 (prinl "true"
true
-> "true"
: (setq Test2 "Nope")
-> "Nope"
: (case Test1 (1 (unless Test2 (prinl "true"
-> NIL
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 7:5
I'd like to do this but am not sure if it's possible
( case
#= start of match clause
(
(prog
(if () (EXIT THIS MATCH CLAUSE/PROG))
(otherwise you'll execute this statement)
)
)
#= end of match clause
.
.
.
I also wonder if there'
11 matches
Mail list logo