Re: typo in accept-process-output (process.c)

[Stephen Berman <Stephen.Berman@gmx.net>]

On Mon, 06 Aug 2007 16:50:45 -0400 Michael Olson <mwolson@gnu.org> wrote:

> Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:
>
>>     So the job only has to be done once, what replacement will people
>>     be happy with? Personally, I think plain "if" would be just fine,
>>     except perhaps to the tediously literal-minded.
>>
>> In some cases, just "if" is clear.
>>
>>     Failing that, "only if".  As a last resort, "if and only if"
>>     (yuck).
>>
>> Where just "if" is not clear, you need to get creative.  Find a
>> rewrite which is clear.  "If and only if" is ok when you need it, but
>> since it is a bit longer, you might look for a better method.
>
> The conditionals "only if" and "if" are both unidirectional, whereas "if
> and only if" is bidirectional.  If you want to preserve the logic, it is
> best to change "iff" to "if and only if".  It's not nearly as gross as
> changing the meaning would be.

The logic textbook by Kalish and Montague uses "`exactly on condition
that', and sometimes `just in case', as stylistic variants of `if and
only if'."

Steve Berman