[mercury-users] false/fail Re: failure warning

[Fergus Henderson]

On 21-Aug-2003, Peter Moulder <Peter.Moulder at infotech.monash.edu.au> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 03:39:55PM +1000, Ralph Becket wrote:
> > Peter Moulder, Thursday, 21 August 2003:
> > > In fact in the first version of the patch I did write `false' instead of
> > > `fail': I think it better to encourage people to think logically with
> > > `false' than imperatively with `fail'.  I think `false' should become a
> > > builtin synonymous with `fail'.
> > 
> > false/0 *is* defined in the builtin.m standard library module.
> 
> I may have misused the word builtin above.  I was trying to suggest that
> false be implemented the way `fail' is, as an empty disjunction rather
> than a predicate.  
> 
> Regardless of the implementation, the intent is that there be no
> disincentive to using `false' instead of `fail'.

I agree.  The fix should be fairly simple... I encourage you to submit
a patch for it.

-- 
Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs.mu.oz.au>  |  "I have always known that the pursuit
The University of Melbourne         |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>  |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-users mailing list
post:  mercury-users at cs.mu.oz.au
administrative address: owner-mercury-users at cs.mu.oz.au
unsubscribe: Address: mercury-users-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: unsubscribe
subscribe:   Address: mercury-users-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: subscribe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------