From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alan Schmitt <alan.schmitt@polytechnique.org>
Subject: Re: org-review-schedule
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2014 10:08:40 +0200
Message-ID: <m2a9b78a9j.fsf@polytechnique.org>
References: <m2ppke1izt.fsf@polytechnique.org> <877g6leltk.fsf@bzg.ath.cx>
	<m2iopzdjyx.fsf@polytechnique.org> <87fvl1lx50.fsf@gmail.com>
	<m21twkbh8b.fsf@polytechnique.org> <87tx9gjrzg.fsf@gmail.com>
	<87zjj8jn12.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]:46452)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alan.schmitt@polytechnique.org>) id 1WeKE1-0005qd-O8
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Apr 2014 04:14:21 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alan.schmitt@polytechnique.org>) id 1WeKDt-0003E1-6k
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Apr 2014 04:14:13 -0400
Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.104]:41467)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <alan.schmitt@polytechnique.org>) id 1WeKDs-0003Di-W4
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Apr 2014 04:14:05 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87zjj8jn12.fsf@gmail.com> (Nicolas Goaziou's message of "Sat, 26
	Apr 2014 14:25:13 +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: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org, Thorsten Jolitz <tjolitz@gmail.com>

On 2014-04-26 14:25, Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com> writes:

> Thorsten Jolitz <tjolitz@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> the answer is in the quote already:
>>
>> ,---------------------------------------------
>> | Since return value matters, I suggest to use ...
>> `---------------------------------------------
>
> Exactly. I use `when' if side-effects are involved or if the code is too
> long and doesn't fit nicely in a `and' branch.
>
> Of course, this is nitpicking. There's nothing wrong with `when'
> variant.

I think I get it now. Thanks a lot.

Alan