On 12/12/02 4:41 PM, Dave Whipp wrote: > "John Siracusa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> memory addresses is so infrequent that warrants a much >> less common and/or longer method name than "id". > > Another reason for not making these synonymous: > > [...] > If memory addresses can change over time, then we > need a more fundamental concept to act as the ID!
Heh, it seems like you're supporting my position, but you're really not :) Whatever the "this is the same object" value actually is, I don't think it deserves to live under the method name "id". -John
