@Richard O’Keefe: I’m trying to find the place in the ANSI Standard you are citing. All I’ve found so far is at 5.3.1.1:
The meaning of "equivalent" cannot be precisely defined but the intent is that two objects are considered equivalent if they can be used interchangeably. Conforming protocols may choose to more precisely define the meaning of "equivalent”. Can you provide a reference for your assertion that objects must be of the same class in order to be equivalent? How about other comparisons between objects of different classes? Is 1.9 < 2? Is 2.1 > 2? How about 2.0 = 2? Is #a < ‘b’? is #b > ‘a’? How about #a = ‘a’? It seems strange to suggest that an object can be less than or greater than, but not equal to! James > On Jul 31, 2018, at 9:24 PM, Richard O'Keefe <[email protected]> wrote: > @James Foster: 100%. There are no exceptions > > On 1 August 2018 at 02:05, James Foster <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > To what extent is it required by ANSI that objects be of the same class?
