On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 00:14:45 -0800, Siddhartha Kasivajhula <skasi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Another way to think of it could be to interpret the operator as asking, >"do the arguments supplied form an equivalence class ><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_class>?" If only one argument is >supplied, then it trivially forms such a class. What about Common Lisp's /= and char/= functions? Can nonequivalent values form an equivalence class? I note that neither Scheme nor Racket implements these functions. Is there some pedagogical reason, or is it simply a practical realization that "(/= _)" is interchangeable with "(not (= _))" ? Not a language theorist, just an aging compiler geek. George -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/pfunteltm3sm5irkjifvh00r7mien6l1nm%404ax.com.
