[Openmcl-devel] Shortcircuiting of argument evaluation in #'<

[Tom Emerson]

On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Ron Garret <ron at flownet.com> wrote:
> IMO this is a bug in the spec, not CCL.  (< a b c ...) ought to mean (and (< a b) (< b c) ...)
[...]

By which I assume you mean the definition of the comparison operators
in 12.2, where, "[t]he value of < is true if the numbers are in
monotonically increasing order; otherwise it is false." To short
circuit wouldn't #'< need to become a special operator? Otherwise its
behavior will be different from every other function.

> Putting side-effecting code inside a comparison operator is a Truly Horrible Idea[.]

Indeed.

    -tree

-- 
Tom Emerson
tremerson at gmail.com
http://www.dreamersrealm.net/tree