Darren Duncan wrote:
Now, I didn't see them yet anywhere in Synopsis 3, but I strongly
recommend having negated versions of all these various types of equality
tests. Eg, !== for ===, nev for eqv, etc. They would be used very
frequently, I believe (and I have even tried to do so), and of course we
get the nice parity.
Yes and they should be strictly implicitly defined in term of the
positive versions in such a way that you can't explicitly redefine them
separately. I.e., $x !== $y should always mean exactly the same thing
as !($x === $y). Maybe by a macro definition. To do otherwise would be
very confusing as it would make such simple program transformations as:
say "foo" if $x !== $y;
into
say "foo" unless $x === $y;
very unreliable.
Actually a similar argument could be made about '<' vs '>', '>=' and
'<=' in other words just redefining '==' & '<' should automatically get
you '!=', '<=', '>=' and '>'.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
