Re: is predicate p?

[Marc Espie <espie at quatramaran dot ens dot fr>]

In article <m3ptz26ol5.fsf@merlin.nerim.net> you write:
>kenner@vlsi1.ultra.nyu.edu (Richard Kenner) writes:
>
>|     I would have guidelines rather than a standard here. I would avoid the
>|     use of _p unless you do decide to standardize on this (which seems
>|     very dubious to me). The use of _p is simply not intuitive. 
>| 
>| Perhaps, but it was the earliest conventions used in GCC to distinguish
>| predicates (where the term doesn't have the technical MD file meaning), so
>| most follow this "rule".  This is from LISP conventions and RMS was the
>| origin of its use.

>Writing LISP in C always seems to me to be an intriguing idea 8-\

>-- Gaby


Then why are you writing gcc code ?

gcc is still lisp, mostly.

In fact, I would tend to believe LISP is the only language RMS really knows,
based on his code...

One thing though: gcc would probably be faster if it was truely a dialect
of lisp, like schemes... note that most of the speed trouble we've seen so far
has to do with shared structures, GC, and list processing. (which doesn't
surprise me), and part of the robustness trouble had to do with ubiquitous
structures with actually little or no type at all (e.g., tree nodes, for 
instance). Those are both traditionally plagues of old functional languages...

Food for thought. Or pure jest. You decide.