Re: Comparing DS_HASH_TABLE objects

Peter Gummer wrote:
> Helmut Brandl wrote:
>> Exactly. I would like to have to most natural operator to express object
>> equality. And that is "=". I guess in the majority of the cases the user
>> wants to test object equality and not reference equality.
>>
>> But this is a theoretical wish. Nobody will accept such a discussion.
>> The argument with backward compatibility kills everything in that direction.
>>   
> 
> True, but it's fun to dream of what Eiffel++ might look like ;-)

I am glad that there a persons out thinking about beyond ECMA.

> 
> Following this logic through, we should change the assignment operator 
> to perform copy semantics for reference types, so that a := b would 
> perform what we today write as a := b.twin. This is becoming a bit scary.

I am not sure if I would go so far. Why do you use a := b.twin? Usually
this is not necessary.

But I would use is_deep_equal and deep_twin as a default for is_equal
and twin. The flat twin is not very meaningful in most of the cases.

Helmut



------------------------------------

To Post a message, send it to:   [email protected]
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: [email protected]! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gobo-eiffel/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gobo-eiffel/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[email protected] 
    mailto:[email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/