Arc Forumnew | comments | leaders | submitlogin
2 points by rocketnia 2647 days ago | link | parent

"This decision was made for convenience, as aw illustrates here: "

"Conditionally include things in a string"

Sorry if I enter into a bit of drama here.... I don't have anything against you or aw, but every time I see that comment, something nags at me. :)

At the time, there were about six reasons I didn't respond to that comment (which was a reply to a comment of mine):

1) I didn't consider it to be a "brilliant use," since the workaround without it would be negligible:

  (string "You are going "
          (if (> speed 100) "very " "")
2) Were I to have accepted the brilliance of this use case, I'd only have been more interested in why 'pr didn't have the same behavior (which was my main gripe to begin with):

  arc> (= speed 2)
  arc> (prn "You are going " (if (> speed 100) "very ") "fast")
  You are going nilfast
  "You are going "
3) It was actually something I had already thought of and cast aside for the above reasons. (So it didn't even qualify as something "I'm not thinking of.") If aw was grasping for straws like I was, there probably wasn't much more point in talking about it.

4) It had upvotes too--at least one upvote at the time I first read it. Apparently, what I thought was common sense would be outnumbered.

5) I hadn't programmed in Arc that much yet. Maybe the upvoter(s) saw something there I didn't. At any rate, I'd probably be able to discuss the pros and cons better once I'd used Arc for a while.

6) I did say "I can't think of a single time," and this was a single example. I kinda decided to eat my words on account of that. :-p

Turns out (string:accum ...) is the use case I found that convinced me. The key point was that 'string wasn't consistent for symbols because it was too busy being consistent for lists.

1 point by aw 2644 days ago | link

Just to be clear :-), I wasn't advocating for the behavior, merely answering the question if was there any use for it ^_^


1 point by rocketnia 2644 days ago | link

Thanks for not taking that too harshly. XD