Re: [Chicken-hackers] patch: treat #t as alternative to else in cond

[Aleksej Saushev]

John Cowan <address@hidden> writes:

> Peter Bex scripsit:
>
>> This should probably be handled in the scrutinizer, but for now I guess
>> it's okay to warn on constants.  Attached is a patch that detects other
>> constants as well, because that could be an even more common mistake
>> than a plain #t.
>
> It arises as a result of overly literal translations from Common Lisp,
> where there is no analogue of "else" and people commonly use T as the
> condition for else-clauses.

Sorry? How come that there's <<no analogue for "else">>?
T _is_ the analogue.

It is definitly not a mistake to use #t in cond form, since it is the idiom
common to a number of languages that derive from Lisp.


-- 
BCE HA MOPE!