[#48745] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7267][Open] Dir.glob on Mac OS X returns unexpected string encodings for unicode file names — "kennygrant (Kenny Grant)" <kennygrant@...>

17 messages 2012/11/02

[#48773] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7269][Open] Refinement doesn't work if using locate after method — "ko1 (Koichi Sasada)" <redmine@...>

12 messages 2012/11/03

[#48847] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7274][Open] UnboundMethods should be bindable to any object that is_a?(owner of the UnboundMethod) — "rits (First Last)" <redmine@...>

21 messages 2012/11/04

[#48854] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7276][Open] TestFile#test_utime failure — "jonforums (Jon Forums)" <redmine@...>

14 messages 2012/11/04

[#48988] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7292][Open] Enumerable#to_h — "marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune)" <ruby-core@...>

40 messages 2012/11/06

[#48997] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7297][Open] map_to alias for each_with_object — "nathan.f77 (Nathan Broadbent)" <nathan.f77@...>

19 messages 2012/11/06

[#49001] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7298][Open] Behavior of Enumerator.new different between 1.9.3 and 2.0.0 — "ayumin (Ayumu AIZAWA)" <ayumu.aizawa@...>

12 messages 2012/11/06

[#49018] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7299][Open] Ruby should not completely ignore blocks. — "marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune)" <ruby-core@...>

13 messages 2012/11/07

[#49044] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7304][Open] Random test failures around test_autoclose_true_closed_by_finalizer — "luislavena (Luis Lavena)" <luislavena@...>

11 messages 2012/11/07

[#49196] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7322][Open] Add a new operator name #>< for bit-wise "exclusive or" — "alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov)" <redmine@...>

18 messages 2012/11/10

[#49211] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7328][Open] Move ** operator precedence under unary + and - — "boris_stitnicky (Boris Stitnicky)" <boris@...>

20 messages 2012/11/11

[#49229] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7331][Open] Set the precedence of unary `-` equal to the precedence `-`, same for `+` — "alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov)" <redmine@...>

17 messages 2012/11/11

[#49256] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7336][Open] Flexiable OPerator Precedence — "trans (Thomas Sawyer)" <transfire@...>

18 messages 2012/11/12

[#49354] review open pull requests on github — Zachary Scott <zachary@...>

Could we get a review on any open pull requests on github before the

12 messages 2012/11/15
[#49355] Re: review open pull requests on github — "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...> 2012/11/15

2012/11/15 Zachary Scott <[email protected]>:

[#49356] Re: review open pull requests on github — Zachary Scott <zachary@...> 2012/11/15

Ok, I was hoping one of the maintainers might want to.

[#49451] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7374][Open] File.expand_path resolving to first file/dir instead of absolute path — mdube@... (Martin Dubé) <mdube@...>

12 messages 2012/11/16

[#49463] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7375][Open] embedding libyaml in psych for Ruby 2.0 — "tenderlovemaking (Aaron Patterson)" <aaron@...>

21 messages 2012/11/16
[#49494] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7375] embedding libyaml in psych for Ruby 2.0 — "vo.x (Vit Ondruch)" <v.ondruch@...> 2012/11/17

[#49467] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7377][Open] #indetical? as an alias for #equal? — "aef (Alexander E. Fischer)" <aef@...>

13 messages 2012/11/17

[#49558] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7395][Open] Negative numbers can't be primes by definition — "zzak (Zachary Scott)" <zachary@...>

10 messages 2012/11/19

[#49566] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7400][Open] Incorporate OpenSSL tests from JRuby. — "zzak (Zachary Scott)" <zachary@...>

11 messages 2012/11/19

[#49770] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7414][Open] Now that const_get supports "Foo::Bar" syntax, so should const_defined?. — "robertgleeson (Robert Gleeson)" <rob@...>

9 messages 2012/11/20

[#49950] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7427][Assigned] Update Rubygems — "mame (Yusuke Endoh)" <mame@...>

17 messages 2012/11/24

[#50043] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7429][Open] Provide options for core collections to customize behavior — "headius (Charles Nutter)" <headius@...>

10 messages 2012/11/24

[#50092] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7434][Open] Allow caller_locations and backtrace_locations to receive negative params — "sam.saffron (Sam Saffron)" <sam.saffron@...>

21 messages 2012/11/25

[#50094] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7436][Open] Allow for a "granularity" flag for backtrace_locations — "sam.saffron (Sam Saffron)" <sam.saffron@...>

11 messages 2012/11/25

[#50207] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7445][Open] strptime('%s %z') doesn't work — "felipec (Felipe Contreras)" <felipe.contreras@...>

19 messages 2012/11/27

[#50424] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7485][Open] ruby cannot build on mingw32 due to missing __sync_val_compare_and_swap — "drbrain (Eric Hodel)" <[email protected]>

15 messages 2012/11/30

[#50429] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7487][Open] Cutting through the issues with Refinements — "trans (Thomas Sawyer)" <transfire@...>

13 messages 2012/11/30

[ruby-core:49400] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7359] #eql? and #equal? naming

From: "trans (Thomas Sawyer)" <transfire@...>
Date: 2012-11-16 00:33:45 UTC
List: ruby-core #49400
Issue #7359 has been updated by trans (Thomas Sawyer).


"Making them little more intuitive does not worth breaking millions of existing programs."

That's true, but why does it have to be one or the other? Just,

    alias identical? equal?

And let that be for a year or two while getting word out to people they should start to use #identical? instead of #equal? for future. After a year or two of that, add a warning to #equal?. And let that be for another couple of years. Only after that, in a new major version, e.g. Ruby 2.2, 2.3 or Ruby 3.0 or whatever, would #equal? actually change. Plenty of time for an orderly managed transition.

It may seem minor, but little things add up. Why reject what is clearly an improvement just b/c it requires a managed transition?


----------------------------------------
Feature #7359: #eql? and #equal? naming
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/7359#change-32947

Author: aef (Alexander E. Fischer)
Status: Rejected
Priority: Normal
Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Category: core
Target version: Next Major


In my opinion the difference between @#eql?@ and @#equal?@ is really unintuitive. How about making their difference more obvious by giving one of them a more accurate name?

My proposal is to rename @#equal?@ to @#identic?@.

If you deprecate #equal? at the same time, maybe in the far future it can have a comeback as an alias for #eql? to make those people happy who dislike to use abbreviations just to reduce the character count by two and simultaneously making it harder to read in a classical sense.

If you like it, let me know. Then I will provide a patch.


-- 
http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

In This Thread

Prev Next