Many systems provide a pure and efficient implementation of member/2. In particular, no choice point is left open for:
?- member(b,[a,b]).
true.
In this answer we compare three different list-membership predicates:
member/2, a builtin predicate, as implemented in SWI-Prolog.memberd/2, as defined by the OP:
memberd(E,[X|Xs]) :-
if_(E=X, true, memberd(E,Xs)).
memberd_new/2, a proposed alternative which is defined like this:
memberd_new(E,[X|Xs]) :-
( Xs \= [_|_]
-> E=X
; if_(E=X, true, memberd_new(E,Xs))
).
Let's go!
First, some ground queries:
?- member(b,[a,b]).
true.
?- memberd(b,[a,b]).
true.
?- memberd_new(b,[a,b]).
true.
?- member(a,[a,a]).
true ; true. % BAD
?- memberd(a,[a,a]).
true.
?- memberd_new(a,[a,a]).
true.
?- member(a,[a,b]).
true ; false. % BAD
?- memberd(a,[a,b]).
true.
?- memberd_new(a,[a,b]).
true.
Next, some queries having multiple distinct solutions:
?- member(X,[a,b]).
X = a ; X = b.
?- memberd(X,[a,b]).
X = a ; X = b ; false. % BAD
?- memberd_new(X,[a,b]).
X = a ; X = b.
Next, a test-case suggested in a comment to
a previous answer which broke the version of memberd_new/2 presented earlier.
?- member(a,[a|nonlist]).
true.
?- memberd(a,[a|nonlist]).
true.
?- memberd_new(a,[a|nonlist]).
true. % IMPROVED
A variation of above test-case:
?- member(X,[a|nonlist]).
X = a.
?- memberd(X,[a|nonlist]).
X = a ; false. % BAD
?- memberd_new(X,[a|nonlist]).
X = a. % IMPROVED
Last, some non-terminating queries:
?- member(1,Xs).
Xs = [1|_A]
; Xs = [_A,1|_B]
; Xs = [_A,_B,1|_C]
; Xs = [_A,_B,_C,1|_D]
...
?- memberd(1,Xs).
Xs = [1|_A]
; Xs = [_A,1|_B], dif(_A,1)
; Xs = [_A,_B,1|_C], dif(_A,1), dif(_B,1)
; Xs = [_A,_B,_C,1|_D], dif(_A,1), dif(_B,1), dif(_C,1)
...
?- memberd_new(1,Xs).
Xs = [1|_A]
; Xs = [_A,1|_B], dif(_A,1)
; Xs = [_A,_B,1|_C], dif(_A,1), dif(_B,1)
; Xs = [_A,_B,_C,1|_D], dif(_A,1), dif(_B,1), dif(_C,1)
...