RE: [External] : Re: operations on path lists

[Drew Adams]

> > > I am aware of it, I prefer using `cond' as I get
> > > more clarity.
> >
> > The (t nil) part is of no use, even if you stick to `cond'.
> >
> >   "If no clause succeeds, cond returns nil."
> >
> > one COND, one branch or BODY - in idiomatic
> > Lisp, that's `when'.
> 
> I use it to see the `nil'.
> `cond' in my world has special place, it is not really replacement for
> `if' or other conditionals. It is used in period of programming as it
> helps with thinking during the function ripening.
> 
> In general I will first want to define what the function should return
> without other conditions. The ripening process begins.
>
> I hope you can see how conditions are developed during time. In the
> process of ripening it is good to see `nil' visually in the last
> condition from beginning.

Indeed, cond is easier for making changes
to the behavior.  Not just initially - the
process you describe, but also over longer
periods of time and larger code changes -
evolution.

> Once function is "stable", then I may remove
> what is not any more necessary for some readers.

Yes again.  That's the point that I and
others have been making: communication
to human readers through the code itself.

I personally prefer to keep the code in
(what to me is) the most human-readable
form throughout.  But yes, that can mean
more code shuffling/restructuring as
things evolve.  Sometimes a lot more.

Most of the time I'm the only human who
reads my code.  But I today am not I
tomorrow.  What I understand when writing
some code, especially if complex, can be
different from what I understand when
reading it later, especially much later.

Sometimes I feel like old Krapp in
"Krapp's Last Tape", unable to recognize
his self that he recorded decades earlier.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krapp%27s_Last_Tape