baupla fuzykamni
I don't know how programming languages are
working these days (it's been about a decade
since I learned my latest one) but in the old
days IF was pretty generally a Boolean valued
function would return True (though not do
anything else) if the antecedent were false (and,
if the antecedent were true, would make the
consequent true — and return True). I have some
trouble imagining anything else being called IF
(as opposed to, say, IFF). Your suggestion seems
just perverse, since it amounts (apparently) to
just an _un_conditional setting
b = 0.
wrote:
>
> --- John E Clifford wrote:
> > Well, I see the point, but going against a
> couple
> > thousand years of tradition — in logic and
> > (though for a shorter time) programming
> languages
> > — militates against the change.
>
> I'm not sure about programming languages. For
> example
> in the instruction:
>
> IF a=1 THEN SET b = 0
>
> "IF ... THEN ..." can hardly be {ga nai ... gi
> ... }.
> If a=1 is false we don't want to let the
> computer to
> set b = 0 if it pleases, which {ganai ... gi
> ...}
> presumably would. So the "if" of programming
> languages,
> if it can be compared to a logical connective
> given the
> modalities involved, would have to be iff, {go
> ... gi ...}.