From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alan Schmitt <alan.schmitt@polytechnique.org>
Subject: Re: org-review-schedule
Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 10:57:40 +0200
Message-ID: <m21twkbh8b.fsf@polytechnique.org>
References: <m2ppke1izt.fsf@polytechnique.org> <877g6leltk.fsf@bzg.ath.cx>
	<m2iopzdjyx.fsf@polytechnique.org> <87fvl1lx50.fsf@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38420)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alan.schmitt@polytechnique.org>) id 1WdzNN-0006nD-4w
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Apr 2014 05:58:36 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alan.schmitt@polytechnique.org>) id 1WdzNB-0005kE-Iz
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Apr 2014 05:58:29 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87fvl1lx50.fsf@gmail.com> (Nicolas Goaziou's message of "Fri, 25
	Apr 2014 08:51:39 +0200")
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com>
Cc: Bastien <bzg@gnu.org>, emacs-orgmode <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>

Hi Nicolas,

I've changed all of these, and I will keep testing it over the next few
days. I have one question remaining, though.

On 2014-04-25 08:51, Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com> writes:

>>         (if (time-less-p nt (current-time)) nt)))))
>
> This is a matter of taste, but I find one-armed `if' a bit confusing.
> Since return value matters, I suggest to use
>
>   (and (time-less-p nt (current-time)) nt)

Why not use "(when (time-less-p nt (current-time)) nt)" instead of "and"
here?

Thanks,

Alan