Re: diff. betw. equal and eq on simbols
- From: Russell McManus <russell_mcmanus@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 09:39:14 -0500
Pascal Costanza <pc@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> If you use EQ you tell readers of your program that you don't expect
> to compare anything but just objects. If you use EQL you tell
> readers that you expect to also deal with numbers and
> characters. And so on. This will help readers of your code to make
> assumptions about the intent of the source code and ultimately to
> better understand it. If you always use the same generic operators
> (like EQUAL) the less information you reveal about your intentions.
I almost never use eq, and therefore I'm not giving the programmer any
guarantees about symbols vs. characters vs. numbers etc. Instead I
just use eql.
I think that this is a perfectly valid approach, and I would recommend
it to others. eq is a waste of programmer time as far as I am
concerned.
-russ
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: diff. betw. equal and eq on simbols
- From: Pascal Costanza
- Re: diff. betw. equal and eq on simbols
- References:
- Re: diff. betw. equal and eq on simbols
- From: Pascal Costanza
- Re: diff. betw. equal and eq on simbols
- Prev by Date: Re: Lisp security
- Next by Date: Re: Lisp security
- Previous by thread: Re: diff. betw. equal and eq on simbols
- Next by thread: Re: diff. betw. equal and eq on simbols
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|