[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: (featurep 'multi-tty) => t on Windows

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: (featurep 'multi-tty) => t on Windows
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2008 05:24:43 -0500

> From: address@hidden
> Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 23:03:51 -0700
> Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
> >
> > And how exactly is
> >
> >     (if (featurep 'foo)
> >             (something))
> >
> > cleaner than the latter?
> It's clearer in intention, if nothing else.

Unless "something" includes "foo" as a substring, I don't see how it
is clearer.

> If I understand correctly,
> Juanma considers checking for the existence of a feature to be a cleaner
> way of writing feature specific code than checking for some function
> that may be an indication that such a feature might exist. The two
> approaches are equal in lines of code, but checking for a function so
> that ou may execute code that has nothing to do with that function is
> uglier (though equivalently effective).

Yes, that's what Juanma says, I just am not sure I agree.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]