[armedbear-devel] eql for java objects
ehuels at gmail.com
Sun Apr 25 20:08:08 UTC 2010
>> 1. if EQL is modified, then EQUAL must be modified as well because
>> (eql x y) should always imply (equal x y)
> EQUAL does not internally call EQL? If that's indeed not the case,
> perhaps it should be made so?
>> 2. if we have freedom to modify EQL and EQUAL, then I'd say that EQUAL
>> should call Object.equals(), but I know this is controversial
> No that would be false reasoning IMHO. The only reason why it's
> acceptable to extend EQL that way is because the Notes section in EQL
> kind of implies (albeit does not spell it out explicitly) certain
> implementational freedom in the interplay of EQ and EQL.
That's an additional - and compelling - argument, if you ask me.
Let's go for it.
More information about the armedbear-devel