Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!texsun!smunews!ti-csl!m2.csc.ti.com!usenet
From: Lusky@vdle21 (Steve Lusky)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
Subject: RE: Terminology and style (was Re: Question about INTERN)
Message-ID: <1991Feb14.181140.25730@csc.ti.com>
Date: 14 Feb 91 18:11:40 GMT
Sender: usenet@csc.ti.com (USENET News System)
Organization: TI Computer Science Center, Dallas
Lines: 23
In-Reply-To: <4115@skye.ed.ac.uk>
Nntp-Posting-Host: vdle21.csc.ti.com

In article <4115@skye.ed.ac.uk> you write:
>In article <27B8222F.3C70@wilbur.coyote.trw.com> jay@wiley.UUCP (Jay Nelson) writes:
>>I don't understand the comment about COND.  I use WHEN and UNLESS for
>>single case instances, IF when I want two outcomes, and COND when a
>>sequential set of conditions must be evaluated that doesn't fit the CASE
>>construct.
>
>That's more or less what I do too.
>
>But some people claim that COND is not used except in "old fashioned"
>code.  The suggestion seems to be to use nested IFs instead.  Even
>though COND is just about the hardest thing in Lisp to read, I don't
>think nested IFs are always a good alternative.  On the other hand,
>if established practractice really is moving away from COND, I'd like
>to know that.  Contrariwise, if the textbooks that claim COND is
>obsolete are wrong, I'd like to know _that_.

It is what I do.  I find COND with more than two conditions to be much simpler to
understand than using nested IF's.  It is like a Multiplexer circuit with only one
allowed input.  The code indents cleanly, and looks simpler.  What is the reason for
saying that COND is obsolete?  (COND-EVERY is occasionally useful as well.)

Steve