On Sun, Nov 28, 2021 at 3:33 PM Paul Smith <psm...@gnu.org> wrote: > > On Sun, 2021-11-28 at 08:24 +0100, Jouke Witteveen wrote: > > On the user side, strcmp could now probably be defined something like > > $(and $(intcmp $(words $1),$(words $2)),$(findstring x $1 x,x $2 x)) > > I don't think this is equivalent since a putative strcmp would also do > greater / less than comparison (like intcmp does). Of course that > leads into all sorts of i18n / locale issues, but likely we'd just punt > (like C's strcmp does) and use ASCII ordering; we've already taken that > route elsewhere.
This was only intended as a demonstration of how the two-argument strcmp function could be implemented already (I initially forgot the spaces around the 'x's). This would serve as a test for exact string-wise equality. If anything, this could mean that there is no reason to spend time on adding strcmp now. It's all a digression and I agree with everything you said about it.
