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]

Reply via email to