English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis à jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml à l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
[Caml-list] Semantics of physical equality
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2004-02-28 (10:35)
From: Michal Moskal <malekith@p...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Semantics of physical equality
On Sat, Feb 28, 2004 at 11:21:35AM +0100, Andreas Rossberg wrote:
> > But both r.a and r.b are ints, so it is always OK (== and = are the same
> > on ints).
> That is what the current implementation does, but it is not guaranteed.

On integers and characters, physical equality is identical to structural
equality. [1]

It depends what you mean by ,,guaranteed'' though.

[1] http://caml.inria.fr/ocaml/htmlman/libref/Pervasives.html

: Michal Moskal :: http://www.kernel.pl/~malekith :: GCS !tv h e>+++ b++
: When in doubt, use brute force. -- Ken Thompson :: UL++++$ C++ E--- a?

To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners