Meaning of 'only then'

Question

Is there any difference in meaning between

check that newSnap != m_snap and invoke onSnapEnter only then.

and

check that newSnap != m_snap and invoke onSnapEnter only in that case.

?

Which is the correct way of expressing that the checked condition must fulfil, and not merely predate the invocation?

check that newSnap != m_snap and invoke onSnapEnter only in that case. is not idiomatic. ++ check that newSnap != m_snap and invoke onSnapEnter only then. has the wrong word order. It should be check that newSnap != m_snap and only then invoke onSnapEnter." — Greybeard, Apr 15, 2020 at 15:36
The idiomatic way is probably "if newSnap is not equal to m_snap, call onSnapEnter" but that's probably a duplication of your code. If this is a code comment, it's not adding value. If there's a reason why you don't want to call onSnapEnter for a snap is not actually new, you should probably be explaining that here instead. — Hellion, Apr 15, 2020 at 15:39
I think you are modifying a different sentence; check that newSnap != m_snap and invoke onSnapEnter then and only then. Corresponding to the logic of if and only if. This could well mean to go ahead and invoke onSnapEnter in any event so long as they checked the value of newsnap first. I think in common use this would not be the case but computer folks rely on precision. I would use Greybeard's word order to be sure. — Elliot, Apr 16, 2020 at 3:44
@Greybeard Could you please post your comment as an answer, so I could accept it? — vines, Apr 16, 2020 at 15:03

Greybeard · Accepted Answer · 2020-04-16 22:01:47Z

1

check that newSnap != m_snap and invoke onSnapEnter only in that case. is not idiomatic.

check that newSnap != m_snap and invoke onSnapEnter only then. has the wrong word order.

It should be check that newSnap != m_snap and only then invoke onSnapEnter.

answered Apr 16, 2020 at 22:01

Greybeard

40.4k5 gold badges42 silver badges123 bronze badges

Add a comment |

1 Answer 1