Terrence Brannon wrote at Thu, 27 Jun 2002 15:53:55 +0200: >> and the equivalents isnt_equal, isnt_equal_set, isnt_equal_bag. > > why not simply do: > not List::Compare->is_equal_set > > the negated methods seem unnecessary. Of course the are unnecessary. Well, but from a linguistic view, it seem's reasonable.
If there are two things different, the english speaker says, that "compared, they aren't equal". I think it's the same principle like with the statements 'if' and 'unless'. One of the both is unnecessary, but I won't miss anyone. However, from a linguistic view, the methods a suggested should be called better: are_equal, are_equal_sets, are_equal_bags (perhaps shorter as are_eq, are_eq_sets, are_eq_bags) and the negative methods: arent_eq, arent_eq_sets, arent_eq_bags. (perhaps are_diff, are_diff_sets and are_diff_bags is a better name) Greetings, Janek
