Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!watmath!watdragon!violet!afscian
From: afscian@violet.waterloo.edu (Anthony Scian)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel
Subject: Re: a < b < c
Message-ID: <16213@watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Date: 31 Aug 89 14:59:49 GMT
References: <239@enea.se>
Sender: daemon@watdragon.waterloo.edu
Reply-To: afscian@violet.waterloo.edu (Anthony Scian)
Organization: U. of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 24

In article <239@enea.se> sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog) writes:
>I'm pleased to hear to contributed to Eiffel's development. There
>is one more detail to think of though:
>
>     a < b < f()
>
>Should the language guarantee that f is called? Or should the compiler
>be allowed to skip the call if a >= b? My view is the latter, and a
>quick glance in OOSC doesn't say that Eiffel has a differnt philosophy.
The expression a < b < c could expand into:

	a < b AND IF b < c
rather than
	a < b AND b < c

for boolean expressions in code and for assertions:

	a < b ; b < c

This would be the most useful expansions for the construct.

Anthony
//// Anthony Scian afscian@violet.uwaterloo.ca afscian@violet.waterloo.edu ////
"I can't believe the news today, I can't close my eyes and make it go away" -U2