[squeak-dev] Re: [Vm-dev] Re: [Pharo-project] About ~= and ~~
nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com
Thu Oct 13 20:41:18 UTC 2011
2011/10/13 Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de>:
> On 10/12/2011 22:20, Eliot Miranda wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 1:19 PM, Colin Putney <colin at wiresong.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > People avoid it because of performance. But I much prefer foo ~~ bar ifTrue: than foo == bar ifFalse:. So I suspect/hope dynamic frequency will grow as people find its not such a performance issue any more.
>> Well, no accounting for taste, I guess. I'd avoid it because I much
>> prefer foo == bar iFalse:
> But why, if it doesn't express intent directly? It's cognitively more difficult. You have to negate to get the intent.
> It's really the same either way. My main reason for disliking ~= and ~~ is that both of these are aesthetically unpleasing. I'd much rather see <> instead of ~= and perhaps <==> instead of ~~.
Yes, one could think that ~= is approximately equal...
Though the operator means different in Matlab too.
<> exists in some languages too (Ada ? Fortran 95).
But I dislike <==>
<<>> or <><> or =<>= are not better...
I like =/= but that makes a single selector...
Unless we start using what unicode provides (Fortress).
> - Andreas
More information about the Vm-dev