On Wednesday 28 September 2005 15:06, Marty Kraimer wrote:
> Should == (or equals) always guarantee that it is an equivalence
> relation?
>
> That is
>
> 1) reflexive => x==x is always true
> 2) symetric => if x==y then y==x
> 3) transitive => if x==y and y==z then x==z
Yes, definitely. For an asymmetric operation, I would propose the method
name "match" or "matches".
BTW, is this operation (i.e. what was formerly named "==" on PCs)
supposed to do conversions before comparing values? Or is it defined as
"foreach matching propertyId: same type && same value"?
Ben
- Replies:
- RE: data access structures, strings Jeff Hill
- References:
- RE: data access structures, strings Jeff Hill
- Re: data access structures, strings Marty Kraimer
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
Re: strings Benjamin Franksen
- Next:
meetings this week Matthias Clausen
- Index:
2002
2003
2004
<2005>
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
- Navigate by Thread:
- Prev:
RE: data access structures, strings Jeff Hill
- Next:
RE: data access structures, strings Jeff Hill
- Index:
2002
2003
2004
<2005>
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
|