On Fri, 10 Sep 1999, Florin Mateoc wrote:

> Well, guess what:
> 
> 		'(1/2)' + 0.5	 breaks
> 		(1/2) + '0.5'	 1.0
> 
> 		'(1/2)' * 0.5		 breaks
> 		(1/2) * '0.5'		 0.25
> 
> 	and so on...

So what? The point is, #= does not mean arithmetic equality in Smalltalk
(though for Numbers, and only Numbers, it is equivalent). Besides, I'm no
fan of String arithmetics either. It's a nice example of polymorphism and
the double-dispatched-cooercion-mechanism, though ;-)
 
> 	Plus , between 
> 		'(1/2)' = 0.5	"false"
> 		(1/2) = '0.5'	"true"
> 	IMHO the second result is "truer" than the first one, so maybe we
> should fix the first one instead of falsifying the second one if we care for
> simmetry (I agree, simmetry is good)

That would lead to the following: If (a = b) and (b = c) then (a = c),
right? So from ('3' = 3) and (3 = '3.0') follows ('3' = '3.0')? 

That breaks the rule that two collections are equal if their elements are
equal!

(I think you take the interpretation for the actual contents - to the
computer a string is just a collection of characters, and we shoudn't try 
to tell him/her otherwise...)

> 	I am also sure that simmetry is broken for #= in other cases as
> well, but I'll have to check.

If you find some, please report them as bugs.

> 	As for #reduced I agree with both Bert (#reduce would be better) and
> Leandro (it should have been = instead of ==)

Thanks ;-)

  /bert