On Wed, 17 Sept 2025 at 16:03, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com> writes:
> > On Wed, 3 Sept 2025 at 23:32, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote:
> >> Btw., I think we should stick to the *_p() naming (for "predicate", I
> >> think) for compiler-intrinsic-affiliated functions/macros that report
> >> boolean results.
>
> > I didn't know what the _p suffix was meant to indicate. Do you have a
> > link which states that it's for "predicate"?
>
> It absolutely stands for "predicate". That's an ancient Lisp-ism.
> Here's the first link I found with some quick googling:
>
> https://www.cs.cmu.edu/Groups/AI/html/cltl/clm/node69.html
Thanks for the confirmation. I'm happy enough to leave the _p in
there, but at the same time, I don't see the particular reason to
follow some ancient Lisp rule. Maybe I'm in the minority, having never
programmed in Lisp.
Anyway, at least the justification for it is in the archives now. Thanks.
David
