Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Physical Equality is not adequately documented #4942

Closed
vicuna opened this issue Dec 16, 2009 · 1 comment
Closed

Physical Equality is not adequately documented #4942

vicuna opened this issue Dec 16, 2009 · 1 comment

Comments

@vicuna
Copy link

vicuna commented Dec 16, 2009

Original bug ID: 4942
Reporter: RolandGilead
Status: closed (set by @xavierleroy on 2009-12-30T14:54:04Z)
Resolution: duplicate
Priority: normal
Severity: minor
Version: 3.11.0
Category: documentation
Related to: #4941

Bug description

see #4941
the issue with ID 0004941
"Physical equality is a very subtle beast." - ertai

One should not have to experiment to determine semantics.

Under what conditions physical equality holds is not wholly documented except for objects and it is incongruous that object equality uses (=) not (==) even though (==) is the physical equality operator and "Two objects are equal if and only if they are physically equal. In particular, an object and its copy are not equal."

Additional information

Quick fix, from Pervasives.html
"On mutable structures, e1 == e2 is true if and only if physical modification of e1 also affects e2."
should be changed to
"On mutable structures, if e1 == e2 is true, physical modification of e1 also affects e2."

This way A-->B rather than the current A<-->B.
<-- = --> = "implies"

@vicuna
Copy link
Author

vicuna commented Dec 30, 2009

Comment author: @xavierleroy

See reply to #4941.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant