Re: RFC 54 (v1) Operators: Polymorphic comparisons

[Dan Sugalski]

At 05:12 PM 8/7/00 -0400, Chaim Frenkel wrote:
> >>>>> "DC" == Damian Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> I currently fail to switch to 'eq' many times when I should, but the
> >> failure mode is obvious. Her the failure mode will be really strange.
>
>DC> I would claim that the failure mode is not obvious: "dog"=="cat" is 
>true????
>
>Sure it is. I pass a large amount of data and _everything_ matches! Voila,
>I messed up the test. Test looks okay. (If I was a newbie, '==' is broken.
>Given my experience, I used the wrong test.)

Both ways have issues. "dog"=="cat", but "10.0"ne"10". Both are arguably 
wrong--dogs aren't cats, but 10.0 really is 10...


                                        Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                         have teddy bears and even
                                      teddy bears get drunk