[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Argument order of = equivalence predicates

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 1 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 1 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

   From: John Stone <jstone@xxxxxxxxxxx>
   Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 13:41:44 -0600 (CST)
   * Argument order of = equivalence predicates

	   Terminological point: It isn't an equivalence predicate unless it
   is reflexive, _symmetric_, and transitive.  Notational point:  It's
   extremely misleading to use the identifier `=' for a predicate that is not
   an equivalence predicate.

It's pleasant have a mathematician around to keep things on the straight
and narrow.

This is a good point. The = function not even slightly an equivalence relation
(although in practice, that is the common use). As I spell out in careful
detail in the topic's new text, you can *usefully* (not even pathologicaly)
use a function like <. So I should call it a "comparison" function. How's

But I'm tempted to leave the parameter named "=" since it's short & convenient.
"CMP" or "COMPARE" seems more awkward.