At 02:09 PM 8/24/00 -0400, John Porter wrote: >Markus Peter wrote: > > > > Another possibility would be to use cmpi and eqi > >Actually, all we need is cmpi, since eqi is just !cmpi. >(And eq is !cmp.) Nope. Read the manual. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Mark Cogan [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1-520-881-8101 ArtToday www.arttoday.com
- Re: RFC 143 (v1) Case ignoring eq and cmp operators Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 143 (v1) Case ignoring eq and cmp opera... Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 143 (v1) Case ignoring eq and cmp o... Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 143 (v1) Case ignoring eq and c... Nathan Torkington
- Re: RFC 143 (v1) Case ignoring eq and cmp operators Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: RFC 143 (v1) Case ignoring eq and cmp opera... Glenn Linderman
- infix functions David L. Nicol
- Re: RFC 143 (v1) Case ignoring eq and cmp operators Markus Peter
- Re: RFC 143 (v1) Case ignoring eq and cmp opera... Tom Christiansen
- Re: RFC 143 (v1) Case ignoring eq and cmp opera... John Porter
- Re: RFC 143 (v1) Case ignoring eq and cmp operators Bart Lateur
- Re: RFC 143 (v1) Case ignoring eq and cmp operators Jarkko Hietaniemi
- Re: RFC 143 (v1) Case ignoring eq and cmp operators John Porter
- Re: RFC 143 (v1) Case ignoring eq and cmp operators David L. Nicol
- Re: RFC 143 (v1) Case ignoring eq and cmp operators Steve Simmons