···@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) writes:
> ( defun noun-phrase-start()
> ( loop until( setq result( append-a-random-noun-to( a-random-determiner ))))
> result )
>
> The intention is to return the first result of
> "append-a-random-noun-to" that is not nil. Just for curiosity,
> is there a more idiomatic way to write this?
Just out of curiosity, why do you care about writing idiomatic code
when you consistently ignore people's advice to format your code in a
standard style?
-Peter
--
Peter Seibel * ·····@gigamonkeys.com
Gigamonkeys Consulting * http://www.gigamonkeys.com/
Practical Common Lisp * http://www.gigamonkeys.com/book/
"Stefan Ram" <···@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote in message
··························@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de...
> Peter Seibel <·····@gigamonkeys.com> writes:
>>>The intention is to return the first result of
>>>"append-a-random-noun-to" that is not nil. Just for curiosity,
>>>is there a more idiomatic way to write this?
>>Just out of curiosity, why do you care about writing idiomatic
>>code when you consistently ignore people's advice to format
>>your code in a standard style?
>
> For the moment, I am satisfied with my formatting style, but
You shouldn't be. It will only make it harder to correct yourself later,
which you will necessarily do or you will have to accept being in isolation
as far as lisp coding is concerned.
--
Coby Beck
(remove #\Space "coby 101 @ bigpond . com")
···@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) writes:
> Peter Seibel <·····@gigamonkeys.com> writes:
> >>The intention is to return the first result of
> >>"append-a-random-noun-to" that is not nil. Just for curiosity,
> >>is there a more idiomatic way to write this?
> >Just out of curiosity, why do you care about writing idiomatic
> >code when you consistently ignore people's advice to format
> >your code in a standard style?
>
> For the moment, I am satisfied with my formatting style, but
> not with the "setq" inside of the loop. I thought that there
> could be something like "collect" for this case.
You show an astounding disregard for those of whom you ask advice by
continuing to post code formatted in a way that you have been told is
difficult to read by experienced Lispers. Until you begin showing a
minimum of reciprocation, I hope all the experienced Lispers here just
ignore your posts. I know I will.
--
/|_ .-----------------------.
,' .\ / | Free Mumia Abu-Jamal! |
,--' _,' | Abolish the racist |
/ / | death penalty! |
( -. | `-----------------------'
| ) |
(`-. '--.)
`. )----'
Thomas F. Burdick wrote:
> You show an astounding disregard for those of whom you ask advice by
> continuing to post code formatted in a way that you have been told is
> difficult to read by experienced Lispers. Until you begin showing a
> minimum of reciprocation, I hope all the experienced Lispers here just
> ignore your posts. I know I will.
Note that by quoting any of Stefan Ram's original text in an archived
article, you are violating his X-No-Archive request.
On the other hand if you write a reply without the quoted text, it will
make no sense once your article's parent reference goes dead.
So the best thing is to ignore the posts.
"Kaz Kylheku" <········@gmail.com> writes:
> Note that by quoting any of Stefan Ram's original text in an archived
> article, you are violating his X-No-Archive request.
Fortunately, I'm fairly certain that random headers added to a usenet
message (like his, or what I added to this message) have no legal
meaning.
--
/|_ .-----------------------.
,' .\ / | Free Mumia Abu-Jamal! |
,--' _,' | Abolish the racist |
/ / | death penalty! |
( -. | `-----------------------'
| ) |
(`-. '--.)
`. )----'
···@conquest.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) writes:
> "Kaz Kylheku" <········@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Note that by quoting any of Stefan Ram's original text in an archived
>> article, you are violating his X-No-Archive request.
>
> Fortunately, I'm fairly certain that random headers added to a usenet
> message (like his, or what I added to this message) have no legal
> meaning.
Of course. Note how the X- means it's non-standard, experimental
header. Only the sender may know it's signification.
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
In a World without Walls and Fences,
who needs Windows and Gates?
Pascal Bourguignon <······@informatimago.com> writes:
> ···@conquest.OCF.Berkeley.EDU (Thomas F. Burdick) writes:
>
> > "Kaz Kylheku" <········@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >> Note that by quoting any of Stefan Ram's original text in an archived
> >> article, you are violating his X-No-Archive request.
> >
> > Fortunately, I'm fairly certain that random headers added to a usenet
> > message (like his, or what I added to this message) have no legal
> > meaning.
>
> Of course. Note how the X- means it's non-standard, experimental
> header. Only the sender may know it's signification.
Sense of humor, Pascal, save the EUR 500 and buy yourself one.
--
/|_ .-----------------------.
,' .\ / | Free Mumia Abu-Jamal! |
,--' _,' | Abolish the racist |
/ / | death penalty! |
( -. | `-----------------------'
| ) |
(`-. '--.)
`. )----'
Pascal Bourguignon wrote:
> Of course. Note how the X- means it's non-standard, experimental
> header. Only the sender may know it's signification.
At least Google Groups doesn't archive messages with X-no-archive: they are
only visible for 7 days.
--
Frank Buss, ··@frank-buss.de
http://www.frank-buss.de, http://www.it4-systems.de
On 2006-02-04 23:28:08 +0000, ···@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) said:
> For the moment, I am satisfied with my formatting style, but
iwonderwhetheryouwouldbesatisfiedwithmywayofusingspacing
o r e v e n i f y o u w o u l d f i n d i t e a s i e r
o n y o u r r e a d i n g a b i l i t y i f i w a s m o
r e l i b e r a l i n m y s p a c i n g .
--
JFB