[#4858] Build fails on OSX Tiger 10.4 — noreply@...

Bugs item #1883, was opened at 2005-05-06 14:55

21 messages 2005/05/06
[#4862] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-1883 ] Build fails on OSX Tiger 10.4 — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2005/05/07

Hi,

[#4865] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-1883 ] Build fails on OSX Tiger 10.4 — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...> 2005/05/07

[#4868] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-1883 ] Build fails on OSX Tiger 10.4 — nobu.nokada@... 2005/05/07

Hi,

[#5053] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-1883 ] Build fails on OSX Tiger 10.4 — Shugo Maeda <shugo@...> 2005/05/19

Hi,

[#5056] Re: [ ruby-Bugs-1883 ] Build fails on OSX Tiger 10.4 — Mark Hubbart <discordantus@...> 2005/05/19

On 5/19/05, Shugo Maeda <shugo@ruby-lang.org> wrote:

[#4874] - Need to reduce Ruby Sources to the Minimal — Ilias Lazaridis <ilias@...>

Hello all,

31 messages 2005/05/10
[#4879] Re: [THIN] - Need to reduce Ruby Sources to the Minimal — Pit Capitain <pit@...> 2005/05/11

Ilias Lazaridis schrieb:

[#4883] Re: [THIN] - Need to reduce Ruby Sources to the Minimal — Ilias Lazaridis <ilias@...> 2005/05/12

Pit Capitain wrote:

[#4884] Re: [THIN] - Need to reduce Ruby Sources to the Minimal — Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...> 2005/05/12

[#4888] Re: [THIN] - Need to reduce Ruby Sources to the Minimal — Ilias Lazaridis <ilias@...> 2005/05/12

Ryan Davis wrote:

[#4889] Re: [THIN] - Need to reduce Ruby Sources to the Minimal — ES <ruby-ml@...> 2005/05/12

[#4890] Re: [THIN] - Need to reduce Ruby Sources to the Minimal — Ilias Lazaridis <ilias@...> 2005/05/12

ES wrote:

[#4891] Re: [THIN] - Need to reduce Ruby Sources to the Minimal — Alexander Kellett <ruby-lists@...> 2005/05/12

On May 12, 2005, at 3:13 PM, Ilias Lazaridis wrote:

[#4911] Pointless argc check in Array#select — noreply@...

Patches item #1900, was opened at 2005-05-12 09:33

11 messages 2005/05/12

[#4919] - Hierarchical/Modular Directory Structure — Ilias Lazaridis <ilias@...>

The source-code structure should be simplified, lowering barriers for

20 messages 2005/05/12

Re: Getting rid of Object#equal?()?

From: ES <ruby-ml@...>
Date: 2005-05-11 01:41:56 UTC
List: ruby-core #4878
Gavin Sinclair wrote:
> On Friday, May 6, 2005, 10:04:37 AM, Yukihiro wrote:
> 
> 
>>Hi,
> 
> 
>>In message "Re: Getting rid of Object#equal?()?"
>>    on Thu, 5 May 2005 23:57:30 +0900, Florian Gro<florgro@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> 
>>|I think that we currently have too many equality methods with similar names:
>>|
>>|==: same meaning
>>|eql?: same value (for hashes)
>>|equal?: identical object
>>|
>>|I think that equal?() is rarely used and that removing it completely
>>|would make sense -- after all  a.id == b.id  is not much longer than
>>|a.equal?(b).
> 
> 
>>I'm not motivated too much to remove "equal?".  I assume Ruby users
>>smart enough to distinguish above three without any confusion once
>>they are told.  Are there any reason to remove?
> 
> 
> I'm not so smart; I've had to consult the documentation several times
> to distinguish them.  Probably the simplest solution (psuedu-code):
> 
>   class Object
>     remove_method :equal?
>     alias_method :same? :eql?
>   end
>
> I'd rather use the methods #same? and #== and forget about everything
> else.

I do not think any methods should be removed if it can be avoided.
That way there would be no breakage. Aliasing would work fine:

alias_method :eql   :equals?     # Same value
alias_method :equal :same?       # Same object
alias_method :equal :is?

> Gavin

E

-- 
template<typename duck>
void quack(duck& d) { d.quack(); }

In This Thread