> don't be so rigid with the language that creative applications of the language are rejected.
CAB, thats the obstacle im trying to overcome. [my] solution isnt creative, its simple logic. I would consider OR the creative use; in fact why not use IF (why use OR at all). (if (null (set var ... (set var)...?
> As long as the intent of the code is not obfuscated to the average programmer I don't see the harm.
So you DONT see "(or (set var) (set var)" as obscured instead of "(set var (condition)" That Boolean statement is masking the underlying objective: bind a variable to one of two conditions which is true.
Maybe im reading or thinking about this too much academically. When I was documenting [my] use of cond for my notes, I was following a few links and discovered this is a bona fide issue touched on by people WAY smarter then any of us. I learned that Paul Graham (I didnt know who he was before I read his Bio -- he's fricken uber smart) described this issue in a book called On-Lisp and he called it the "anaphoric-if"
,----[ anaphoric-if ]-
|
| Var is bound to the value of expr in iftrue if the value of expr satisfies the
| conditional; otherwise iffalse is evaluated.
|
| (aif var expr
| iftrue
| iffalse)
|
`----
This quote was in one web page that tried to discuss his theory and I thought it was funny, and would bring some joviality to this discussion so here it is.
,----[ Quote ]-
|
| '"...and even Stigand, the patriotic archbishop of Canterbury, found it advisable--"'
|
| 'Found what?' said the Duck.
|
| 'Found it,' the Mouse replied rather crossly: 'of course you know what "it" means.'
|
| 'I know what "it" means well enough, when I find a thing,' said the Duck: 'it's generally a frog, or a worm. The question is, what did the archbishop find?'
|
| [Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, Chapter III]
|
`----