On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Hendrik Boom <hend...@topoi.pooq.com> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 07:05:37AM -0600, Robby Findler wrote: >> On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 12:30 AM, Gary Baumgartner <g...@cs.toronto.edu> >> wrote: >> > On a more productive note: in Racket code I define and use 'implies' a lot, >> > often conjoined, for predicates. It's mainly of declarative value, which >> > is >> > perhaps why it's uncommon in implementation despite how common it is in >> > specification. And for boolean expressions in general I also use >> > 'neither'. >> > Are these something that others [would] use and so could be added to >> > Racket's >> > library? >> >> Seems to me adding implies, nand, and nor to racket/bool is a good idea. >> >> Let me know if you disagree (and if you disagree after I've already >> committed, it is a simple thing to drop the commit or change it). > > The trouble is, I can never remember which of 'nand' and 'nor' is > which. Either of them could mean 'neither'. But I do know what > 'neither' means.
'nor' is standard terminology for boolean functions, which is why I went with that. I've edited the docs to use the word "neither". If it helps, the usual English construction is "neither A nor B", so maybe that's a good memory clue. Robby ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
