[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen
Fri, 26 Nov 2010 16:45:12 +0100
Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux)
Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:
> If this is only "while debugging and fixing stuff", I don't think it's
> a serious enough problem to warrant such a change.
Well, not, that was just what I was doing moments before writing the
email, so it just reminded me. But the style of doing
(defun foo ()
.. compute a bit more
... do the real foo work here)
feels kinda natural. It's what some people calls "guard based
programming". Without it, you end up with
(defun foo ()
(if (not condition)
.., compute a bit more
(if (not other-condition)
... do the real work)))
where you have to read quite a lot of the code to find out what the exit
points are. I feel like the former style often makes it easier to read
> Note that my preference to stick with the current situation in his
> respect is not just out of inertia but also because I like a more
> functional style of programming: usually/often you can find a
> formulation that's just as elegant without the need for an early exit.
Yeah, you're right, early returns aren't very functional in style.
> I tend to agree that early exit from loops would be sometimes welcome.
> But I'd be OK with adding a `return' from while loops: after all
> `while' loops are naturally imperative, so such a `return' would not
> make things less imperative.
while, dolist, dotimes...
The temptation to rewrite loops using the cl-macs `loop' macro can
sometimes be overwhelming, since you can return from the loop easier.
But using `loop' doesn't seem to be in the Emacs Lisp style, I think --
it's not used a lot, which kinda leads me to think that most Emacs Lisp
programmers don't really know how it works.
And it's not always contortion-free, either.
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
address@hidden * Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen
- return, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen, 2010/11/26
- Re: return, Stefan Monnier, 2010/11/26
- Re: return,
Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <=