From: Zach Dennis <zdennis@...>
Date: 2003-10-02T03:46:02+09:00
Subject: Re: Making == symmetric?

I don't even know if I've been using Ruby long enough( the past few days )
to even comment, so I'll keep my opinions brief.

In regards to what Mark Wilson said about Sean O'Dells comments:

>I don't know enough to have firm views on the topic, but I do have a
>couple of thoughts.
>
>1. Sometimes, one will want two objects of the same class and with the
>same attributes to return false when the == operator is applied. For
>example, a pool of identical server objects should not be considered
>equal to each other.
>
>2. In general, two objects of different classes should return false
>when the == operator is applied to either of them, unless the classes
>differ only in name. I think whether this behavior is varied in
>specific cases would depend on how the class is meant to be used.

on #1. I agree with Mark and I'd also like to say...why would you want
to use the == to return true when comparing different objects, even if
they are of the same class, with the same attributes. Unless one's a pointer
or reference and you are using an equivalency of a === test. I don't see why
someone would want this expected behavior from == itself.

on #2. I think 2 different classes should always return false when compared
to
one another. Otherwise you are getting away from the simplicity and purpose
of a comparison in it's most generic form and you are bringing
in special cases where "behavior is varied". If you want to allow for
special case scenario's then perhaps make a new comparison operator/method
and leave == alone.

I way even be off with my whole post, if I am just tell me to hush up. =)

-Zach