Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihuxq.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ihuxq!ken
From: ken@ihuxq.UUCP (ken perlow)
Newsgroups: net.lang
Subject: Re: IF KICK-BACK GREATER THAN 10 AND LESS THAN 100 THEN ...
Message-ID: <1345@ihuxq.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 20-Nov-84 16:57:30 EST
Article-I.D.: ihuxq.1345
Posted: Tue Nov 20 16:57:30 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 21-Nov-84 19:02:48 EST
References: <440@ima.UUCP> <6172@mcvax.UUCP>, <1241@utah-gr.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 35

--
[In article <440@ima.UUCP> johnl@godot.UUCP writes]

>>PS:  How many other languages let you write:
>>
>>	IF KICK-BACK GREATER THAN 10 AND LESS THAN 100 THEN ...
>>
>>without having to mention kick-back twice?  

["=S", whoever that is, responds]

>> I've had this feature backfire on me, when I carelessly wrote
>> 
>>	IF A NOT EQUAL 10 OR 100 THEN ...
>>
>> Look carefully - the above condition is always true!  You have to
>> write the less intuitive
>> 
>> 	IF A NOT EQUAL 10 AND 100 THEN ...

The statistical package SPSS allowed such a short-cut, and I spent
at least half my time as a consultant trying to explain the rules
of logic to social science researchers who had committed just that
mistake.  Last I knew, SPSS's own consultants had themselves been
bothered so much by irate mis-programmers ("Hello?  SPSS?  Your
stat package doesn't work right!!") that they were determined
to remove the short-cut from future releases (next out was SPSS X).
Anybody know if they did?
-- 
                    *** ***
JE MAINTIENDRAI   ***** *****
                 ****** ******  20 Nov 84 [30 Brumaire An CXCIII]
ken perlow       *****   *****
(312)979-7188     ** ** ** **
..ihnp4!iwsl8!ken   *** ***