Marko Rauhamaa <ma...@pacujo.net> writes: > Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid>: > > > Wrong. If the two objects are not the same, then they will have > > different ID values. If the ID values are the same, then you've only > > got one object. > > Ok, that circularity again.
Yes, it's circular. In an abstract system like a programming language, where the definition only needs to describe behaviour of that system, what is your objection to circularity of definition? A great many abstract systems designed by humans are defined in terms that are ultimately circular. This does not in any way hinder them from being useful definitions of useful systems. -- \ “All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more | `\ robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument | _o__) than others.” —Douglas Adams | Ben Finney -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
