00:08
badkins has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
00:42
badkins has joined #racket
01:00
jeosol has quit [Quit: Ping timeout (120 seconds)]
01:38
jeosol has joined #racket
01:41
codaraxis has quit [Quit: Leaving]
02:13
badkins has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
02:30
jeosol has quit [Quit: Ping timeout (120 seconds)]
02:31
badkins has joined #racket
02:45
jeosol has joined #racket
04:14
badkins has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
04:17
ur5us has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
04:37
jeosol has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
05:10
lewisje has quit [Quit: Leaving]
06:15
badkins has joined #racket
06:20
badkins has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
06:30
skapata has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
06:39
lewisje has joined #racket
07:48
ur5us has joined #racket
08:11
mdhughes_ has joined #racket
08:11
mdhughes has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
08:33
mdhughes_ is now known as mdhughes
08:41
ur5us has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
09:34
ttree has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:34
ttree has joined #racket
09:42
ttree has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
09:43
ttree has joined #racket
10:05
sxn has joined #racket
10:17
badkins has joined #racket
10:22
badkins has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
10:52
ttree has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
11:33
codingquark has quit [Ping timeout: 268 seconds]
11:40
ur5us has joined #racket
11:49
codingquark has joined #racket
12:02
ur5us has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
13:17
epolanski has joined #racket
13:45
morte_ has joined #racket
14:19
badkins has joined #racket
14:24
badkins has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
14:59
bhrgunatha has joined #racket
15:00
bhrgunatha has quit [Client Quit]
15:21
badkins has joined #racket
15:24
skapata has joined #racket
15:26
badkins has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
15:33
badkins has joined #racket
15:54
jeosol has joined #racket
16:00
jeosol has quit [Quit: Ping timeout (120 seconds)]
16:45
sxn1 has joined #racket
16:47
sxn has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
16:48
badkins has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
16:49
sxn1 has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
16:51
badkins has joined #racket
16:55
badkins has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
16:55
badkins has joined #racket
17:38
sxn has joined #racket
17:42
sxn has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
17:47
ec has joined #racket
17:51
ec_ has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
17:52
ncf has quit [Quit: Fairfarren.]
17:52
ncf has joined #racket
17:54
jeosol has joined #racket
17:56
sxn has joined #racket
18:02
jeosol has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
18:05
jeosol has joined #racket
18:08
skapate has joined #racket
18:09
skapata has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
18:12
badkins has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
18:16
jeosol has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
18:30
badkins has joined #racket
18:31
ec_ has joined #racket
18:32
Avichi has joined #racket
18:33
ec__ has joined #racket
18:34
ec has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
18:37
ec_ has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
18:51
sxn has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
18:56
Avichi has quit [Quit: Client closed]
18:56
Avichi has joined #racket
19:01
Avichi has quit [Quit: Client closed]
19:02
Avichi has joined #racket
19:07
epolanski has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
19:21
morte_ has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
19:39
skapate has quit [Quit: Bonan tageron kaj ĝis la.]
19:41
runrin has joined #racket
19:47
badkins has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
20:10
badkins has joined #racket
20:19
runrin has quit [Quit: leaving]
21:10
runrin has joined #racket
21:14
pagnol has joined #racket
21:18
skapata has joined #racket
21:19
badkins has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
21:22
badkins has joined #racket
21:36
ur5us has joined #racket
21:39
msiism has joined #racket
21:44
<
msiism >
Is it bad practice to rely on `and` short-circuting when an expression in the "and chain" depends on its predecessor to be true in order to be executed in a meaningful way?
21:45
<
msiism >
For example, say, you have a procedure call in that and chain that requires a numeric string as its argument.
21:46
<
msiism >
And at the position before that, there's you call a procedure that does check that string for actually being numeric.
21:49
<
msiism >
Now, this will surely work. But the thing is that doing it that way, the relation between these two expressions is implicit.
21:50
<
msiism >
If, on the other hand, I'd use `if`, it would be overt.
21:50
<
msiism >
I tend to think the latter is better.
21:50
sxn has joined #racket
21:59
<
samth >
msiism: something like (and (number? x) (+ x 5)) is definitely idiomatic
22:00
sxn has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
22:00
<
msiism >
Okay, I see.
22:00
<
msiism >
Yeah, that's what I meant, basically.
22:01
<
msiism >
I guess I still prefer to make things explicit with `if` in less obvious cases.
22:02
<
msiism >
Less obvious meaning both that there are a couple more expressions given to `and` and that their relation might not be immediately apparent from the procedure names.
22:03
badkins has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
22:15
ur5us has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
22:16
sxn has joined #racket
22:20
sxn has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
22:31
Avichi has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
22:31
pagnol has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
22:36
msiism has quit [Quit: Konversation vaporized.]
23:05
sxn has joined #racket
23:09
sxn has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
23:59
badkins has joined #racket