blood and soul english download
Saturday, March 9, 2019

blood and soul english download

Short-circuit evaluation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigation
Jump to search

Not to be confused with Short-circuit test .
This article needs additional citations for verification . Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources . Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2013) ( Learn how and when to remove this template message )
Evaluation strategies
  • Eager evaluation
  • Lazy evaluation
  • Partial evaluation
  • Remote evaluation
  • Short-circuit evaluation
  • v
  • t
  • e

Short-circuit evaluation, minimal evaluation, or McCarthy evaluation (after John McCarthy ) is the semantics of some Boolean operators in some programming languages in which the second argument is executed or evaluated only if the first argument does not suffice to determine the value of the expression: when the first argument of the AND function evaluates to false, the overall value must be false; and when the first argument of the OR function evaluates to true, the overall value must be true. In some programming languages ( Lisp , Perl , Haskell because of lazy evaluation ), the usual Boolean operators are short-circuit. In others ( Ada , Java ), both short-circuit and standard Boolean operators are available. For some Boolean operations, like exclusive or (XOR), it is not possible to short-circuit, because both operands are always required to determine the result.

The short-circuit expression x and y is equivalent to the conditional expression if x then y else false; the expression x or y is equivalent to if x then true else y.

Short-circuit operators are, in effect, control structures rather than simple arithmetic operators, as they are not strict . In imperative language terms (notably C and C++ ), where side effects are important, short-circuit operators introduce a sequence point – they completely evaluate the first argument, including any side effects, before (optionally) processing the second argument. ALGOL 68 used proceduring to achieve user-defined short-circuit operators and procedures.

In loosely typed languages that have more than the two truth-values True and False, short-circuit operators may return the last evaluated subexpression, so that x or y and x and y are equivalent to if x then x else y and if x then y else x respectively (without evaluating x twice). This is called “last value” in the table below.

In languages that use lazy evaluation by default (like Haskell ), all functions are effectively short-circuit, and special short-circuit operators are not needed.

The use of short-circuit operators has been criticized as problematic:

The conditional connectives — “cand” and “cor” for short — are … less innocent than they might seem at first sight. For instance, cor does not distribute over cand: compare

(A cand B) cor C with (A cor C) cand (B cor C);

in the case ¬A ∧ C , the second expression requires B to be defined, the first one does not. Because the conditional connectives thus complicate the formal reasoning about programs, they are better avoided.

—  Edsger W. Dijkstra [1]


  • 1 Support in common programming languages
  • 2 Common use
    • 2.1 Avoiding undesired side effects of the second argument
  • 3 Possible problems
    • 3.1 Untested second condition leads to unperformed side effect
    • 3.2 Code efficiency
  • 4 References

Support in common programming languages[ edit ]

Boolean operators in various languages
Language Eager operatorsShort-circuit operatorsResult type
Advanced Business Application Programming ( ABAP )noneand, orBoolean1
Adaand, orand then, or elseBoolean
ALGOL 68and, &, ∧ ; or, ∨andf , orf (both user defined)Boolean
awknone&&, ||Boolean
C , Objective-Cnone&&, ||, ? [2] int (&&,||), opnd-dependent (?)
C++ 2none&&, ||, ? [3] Boolean (&&,||), opnd-dependent (?)
C#&, |&&, ||, ?, ??Boolean (&&,||), opnd-dependent (?, ??)
ColdFusion Markup Language (CFML)noneAND, OR, &&, ||Boolean
D 3&, |&&, ||, ?Boolean (&&,||), opnd-dependent (?)
Eiffeland, orand then, or elseBoolean
Erlangand, orandalso, orelseBoolean
Fortran 4.and., .or..and., .or.Boolean
Go , Haskell , OCamlnone&&, ||Boolean
Java , MATLAB , R , Swift&, |&&, ||Boolean
JavaScript , Julia&, |&&, ||Last value
Lassononeand, or, &&, ||Last value
Kotlinand, or&&, ||Boolean
Lisp , Lua , Schemenoneand, orLast value
MUMPS (M)&, !noneNumeric
Modula-2noneAND, ORBoolean
Oberonnone&, ORBoolean
OCamlnone&&, ||Boolean
Pascaland, or5,9and_then, or_else6,9Boolean
Perl , Ruby&, |&&, and, ||, orLast value
PHP&, |&&, and, ||, orBoolean
Python&, |and, orLast value
Smalltalk&, |and:, or:7Boolean
Standard MLUnknownandalso, orelseBoolean
TTCN-3noneand, or [4] Boolean
Visual Basic .NETAnd, OrAndAlso, OrElseBoolean
VBScript , Visual Basic , Visual Basic for Applications (VBA)And, OrSelect Case8Numeric
Wolfram LanguageAnd @@ ..., Or @@ ...And, Or, &&, ||Boolean

1 ABAP has no distinct boolean type.
2 When overloaded, the operators && and || are eager and can return any type.
3 This only applies to runtime-evaluated expressions, static if and static assert. Expressions in static initializers or manifest constants use eager evaluation.
4 Fortran operators are neither short-circuit nor eager: the language specification allows the compiler to select the method for optimization.
5 ISO/IEC 10206:1990 Extended Pascal allows, but does not require, short-circuiting.
6 ISO/IEC 10206:1990 Extended Pascal supports and_then and or_else. [5]
7 Smalltalk uses short-circuit semantics as long as the argument to and: is a block (e.g., false and: [Transcript show: 'Wont see me']).
8 BASIC languages that supported CASE statements did so by using the conditional evaluation system, rather than as jump tables limited to fixed labels.
9 Delphi_(programming_language) and Free_Pascal default to short circuit evaluation. This may be changed by compiler options but does not seem to be used widely.

Common use[ edit ]

Avoiding undesired side effects of the second argument[ edit ]

Usual example, using a C-based language:

int denom = 0;if (denom != 0 && num / denom) ... // ensures that calculating num/denom never results in divide-by-zero error 

Consider the following example:

int a = 0;if (a != 0 && myfunc(b)) do_something();

In this example, short-circuit evaluation guarantees that myfunc(b) is never called. This is because a != 0 evaluates to false. This feature permits two useful programming constructs.

  1. If the first sub-expression checks whether an expensive computation is needed and the check evaluates to false, one can eliminate expensive computation in the second argument.
  2. It permits a construct where the first expression guarantees a condition without which the second expression may cause a run-time error .

Both are illustrated in the following C snippet where minimal evaluation prevents both null pointer dereference and excess memory fetches:

bool is_first_char_valid_alpha_unsafe(const char *p) return isalpha(p[0]); // SEGFAULT highly possible with p == NULLbool is_first_char_valid_alpha(const char *p) return p != NULL && isalpha(p[0]); // 1) no unneeded isalpha() execution with p == NULL, 2) no SEGFAULT risk

Possible problems[ edit ]

Untested second condition leads to unperformed side effect[ edit ]

Despite these benefits, minimal evaluation may cause problems for programmers who do not realize (or forget) it is happening. For example, in the code

if (expressionA && myfunc(b))  do_something();

if myfunc(b) is supposed to perform some required operation regardless of whether do_something() is executed, such as allocating system resources, and expressionA evaluates as false, then myfunc(b) will not execute, which could cause problems. Some programming languages, such as Java , have two operators, one that employs minimal evaluation and one that does not, to avoid this problem.

Problems with unperformed side effect statements can be easily solved with proper programming style, i.e., not using side effects in boolean statements, as using values with side effects in evaluations tends to generally make the code opaque and error-prone. [6]

Since minimal evaluation is part of an operator’s semantic definition and not an (optional) optimization, many coding styles[ which? ] rely on it as a succinct (if idiomatic) conditional construct, such as these Perl idioms:

some_condition or die; # Abort execution if some_condition is falsesome_condition and die; # Abort execution if some_condition is true

Code efficiency[ edit ]

Short-circuiting can lead to errors in branch prediction on modern central processing units (CPUs), and dramatically reduce performance. A notable example is highly optimized ray with axis aligned box intersection code in ray tracing .[ clarification needed ] Some compilers can detect such cases and emit faster code, but programming language semantics may constrain such optimizations.[ citation needed ]

References[ edit ]

  1. ^ Edsger W. Dijkstra “On a somewhat disappointing correspondence”, EWD1009-0, 25 May 1987 full text
  2. ^ ISO/IEC 9899 standard, section 6.5.13
  3. ^ ISO/IEC IS 14882 draft.
  4. ^ ETSI ES 201 873-1 V4.10.1, section 7.1.4
  5. ^ “and_then – The GNU Pascal Manual” . Retrieved 2013-08-24.

  6. ^ “Referential Transparency, Definiteness and Unfoldability” (PDF). Retrieved 2013-08-24.

Retrieved from ” ”
Categories :

  • Evaluation strategy
  • Compiler optimizations
  • Implementation of functional programming languages
Hidden categories:

  • Articles needing additional references from August 2013
  • All articles needing additional references
  • All articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases
  • Articles with specifically marked weasel-worded phrases from July 2010
  • Wikipedia articles needing clarification from November 2010
  • All articles with unsourced statements
  • Articles with unsourced statements from October 2016
  • Articles with example C code
  • Articles with example Perl code

Navigation menu

Personal tools

  • Not logged in
  • Talk
  • Contributions
  • Create account
  • Log in


  • Article
  • Talk



    • Read
    • Edit
    • View history



      • Main page
      • Contents
      • Featured content
      • Current events
      • Random article
      • Donate to Wikipedia
      • Wikipedia store


      • Help
      • About Wikipedia
      • Community portal
      • Recent changes
      • Contact page


      • What links here
      • Related changes
      • Upload file
      • Special pages
      • Permanent link
      • Page information
      • Wikidata item
      • Cite this page


      • Create a book
      • Download as PDF
      • Printable version


      • Čeština
      • Deutsch
      • Español
      • Italiano
      • 日本語
      • Português
      • 中文
      Edit links

      • This page was last edited on 6 November 2018, at 12:26 (UTC).
      • Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License ;
        additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy . Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. , a non-profit organization.
      • Privacy policy
      • About Wikipedia
      • Disclaimers
      • Contact Wikipedia
      • Developers
      • Cookie statement
      • Mobile view
      • Wikimedia Foundation
      • Powered by MediaWiki