Andy, Not "equals" but "equalTo". Does your point still hold for equalTo?
Claude On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:18 AM, Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 22/11/17 21:27, Claude Warren wrote: > >> I think equalTo for ElementData is not correct. Given 2 ElementData >> instances >> >> ElementData 1: >> {noformat} >> >> VALUES ( ?x ?v ) { >> ( "three" <one> ) >> ( "four" <two> ) >> } >> >> {noformat} >> >> ElementData 2: >> >> {noformat} >> >> VALUES ( ?v ?x ) { >> ( <one> "three" ) >> ( <two> "four" ) >> } >> >> {noformat} >> >> shouldn't the equalTo() method return true. >> >> Currently it is sensitive to the ordering of the vars. >> >> I can put a fix in but I want to be sure that there is an error first. >> > > It's not an error. > > Element* are syntax. and ".equals" is a syntax test, not a semantic test. > The variables are in a different order and in synatx that is significant. > > This is true throughout the abstract syntax provided by Element*. There > are lots of ways to write "the same" query. .equals means "same abstract > syntax". > > Try "qparse" - it always checks the query round-trips as well as printing > it. > > Andy > > >> Claude >> >> -- I like: Like Like - The likeliest place on the web <http://like-like.xenei.com> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/claudewarren
