[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Fixes boolean/SCM confusions, part 1. (issue 4875054)
From: |
Han-Wen Nienhuys |
Subject: |
Re: Fixes boolean/SCM confusions, part 1. (issue 4875054) |
Date: |
Fri, 19 Aug 2011 17:34:56 -0300 |
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 6:14 AM, Bertrand Bordage
<address@hidden> wrote:
>> It is somewhat amusing, by the way, that Lilypond's to_boolean is
>> required in order to let '() and #f be interpreted in the same manner.
>> It would seem that Lisp's conflating them into `nil' is not the worst
>> idea.
>
> This also mislead me a long time ago.
It's a historical artefact of old lilypond code that would add objects
to lists like
set_property("foo", scm_cons(bla, get_property("foo"))
for this to work, the default value of get_property() must be '().
For booleans, it's a reasonable default to be off, so we have to
interpret '() as false.
Scheme has a similar confusion in that all non-#f values are
interpreted to be true.
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys - address@hidden - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
- Re: Fixes boolean/SCM confusions, part 1. (issue 4875054), (continued)
- Re: Fixes boolean/SCM confusions, part 1. (issue 4875054), dak, 2011/08/18
- Re: Fixes boolean/SCM confusions, part 1. (issue 4875054), Carl . D . Sorensen, 2011/08/18
- Re: Fixes boolean/SCM confusions, part 1. (issue 4875054), cecile . hauchemaille, 2011/08/18
- Re: Fixes boolean/SCM confusions, part 1. (issue 4875054), dak, 2011/08/18
- Re: Fixes boolean/SCM confusions, part 1. (issue 4875054), Carl . D . Sorensen, 2011/08/18
- Re: Fixes boolean/SCM confusions, part 1. (issue 4875054), Graham Percival, 2011/08/18
- Re: Fixes boolean/SCM confusions, part 1. (issue 4875054), David Kastrup, 2011/08/19
- Re: Fixes boolean/SCM confusions, part 1. (issue 4875054), Bertrand Bordage, 2011/08/19
- Re: Fixes boolean/SCM confusions, part 1. (issue 4875054), David Kastrup, 2011/08/19
- Re: Fixes boolean/SCM confusions, part 1. (issue 4875054), Bertrand Bordage, 2011/08/19
- Re: Fixes boolean/SCM confusions, part 1. (issue 4875054),
Han-Wen Nienhuys <=
- Re: Fixes boolean/SCM confusions, part 1. (issue 4875054), David Kastrup, 2011/08/19