Sha Chancellor wrote:
> In article <cdppih$1ab1$1@digitaldaemon.com>,
>  "Matthew" <admin.hat@stlsoft.dot.org> wrote:
> 
> 
...
> Why don't i see === on the expressions page?  What would be the difference between it and ==?  Is null now meaning something other than 0 in D?  

The documentation is incomplete. Basically, "====" has the same purpose as "is". They test to see if two object references are identical (that they both point to the same object).

So "==" you're comparing *values" and with "===" you're comparing *references*. It's a subtle difference, but it's an important one. I'm sure someone else can explain it better than I can.

Anyways, here's code I found lying around on my computer that might help explain "===" and "is" do.


void main()
{ 	
  Object o, p;
		
		
  /* o and p are instantiated as separate (different) objects. */
  o = new Object();
  p = new Object();
	
	
  if(o is p) printf("o and p are references to the same object.\n");
  else printf("o and p are different objects.\n");

  if(!(o is p)) printf("They're not the same.\n");
  else printf("Yes, o is the same reference as p!\n");

  if(o === p) printf("o and p are references to the same object.\n");
  else printf("o and p are different objects.\n");

  if(!(o === p)) printf("They're not the same.\n");
  else printf("Yes, o is the same reference as p!\n");

  if(o !== p) printf("They're not the same.\n");
  else printf("Yes, o is the same reference as p!\n");

	
  printf("\nNow I'm gong to make them the same...\n");
	
  delete p;
  o = p;  	/* Now they're the same. */
	
  if(o is p) printf("o and p are references to the same object.\n");
  else printf("o and p are different objects.\n");

  if(!(o is p)) printf("They're not the same.\n");
  else printf("Yes, o is the same referenceas p!\n");

  if(o === p) printf("o and p are references to the same object.\n");
  else printf("o and p are different objects.\n");

  if(!(o === p)) printf("They're not the same.\n");
  else printf("Yes, o is the same reference as p!\n");

  if(o !== p) printf("They're not the same.\n");
  else printf("Yes, o is the same reference as p!\n");
		
}


> 
> Sorry for the stupid questions.

They're not stupid questions. I hope I answered them.

-- 
Justin (a/k/a jcc7)
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/

Kris wrote:
> "J C Calvarese"  wrote ...
> 
>>Actually, "isnuttin" is the best!
>>
>>Hmmm, on second thought, it's a tad verbose.
>>
>>OK, "aint" it is!
>>
> 
> 
> James ought to get some kind of medal for that one ~ it's priceless <g>
> 
> I'd lay a bet it's part of the Ebonics Computer Science curriculum in
> Oakland ... (that's "Political Correctness Meets Lunacy" for those who ain't
> familiar).

I think in Ebonics it's either "benot" or "beaint", but I'm not certain.

-- 
Justin (a/k/a jcc7)
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/

On Sat, 24 Jul 2004 03:00:02 +1000, James McComb <alan@jamesmccomb.id.au> wrote:
> Ben Hinkle wrote:
>
>> if a single keyword is chosen I propose "isnt" since "isn't" is the
>> contraction of "is" and "not". The word "isnot" doesn't exist.
>
> The word "typedef" isn't a word either. I don't suppose you want Walter to introduce a "type definition" keyword.

To be fair, you're commiting the "Strawman" here:
  http://www.intrepidsoftware.com/fallacy/straw.php

The first argument for "isnt" is the stronger of the two, and you've completely ignored it. I do agree "isnot" shouldn't be ignored as an option just because it isn't a word.

"isnt" gets my vote BTW.

Regan

-- 
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

In article <opsbm5hylk5a2sq9@digitalmars.com>, Regan Heath says...

>I do agree "isnot" shouldn't be ignored as an option just because it isn't a word.

So how come no-one's mentioned the possibility of "isNot" yet?

From the style guide Naming Conventions section: "Names formed by joining multiple works should have each word other than the first capitalized."

Arcane Jill

Arcane Jill wrote:
> In article <opsbm5hylk5a2sq9@digitalmars.com>, Regan Heath says...
> 
> 
>>I do agree "isnot" shouldn't be ignored as an option just because it isn't a word.
> 
> 
> So how come no-one's mentioned the possibility of "isNot" yet? 
> 
> From the style guide Naming Conventions section: "Names formed by joining
> multiple works should have each word other than the first capitalized."
> 
> Arcane Jill

Capitalization of the second word never even occurred to me.

It probably hasn't been brought up because the goal here is to get a new keyword. Since every other keyword is all lowercase (including typedef, typeof, ireal, ubyte, and ushort), "isNot" would stick out as a sore thumb as an addition to that list.

-- 
Justin (a/k/a jcc7)
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/

In article <ce0m8n$2d6f$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Arcane Jill says...

>So how come no-one's mentioned the possibility of "isNot" yet?
>
>From the style guide Naming Conventions section: "Names formed by joining multiple works should have each word other than the first capitalized."
>
>Arcane Jill

isnot is faster to type than isNot
how about aint ? even faster and looks kewl ;)

J C Calvarese wrote:

> Kris wrote:
> 
>> "J C Calvarese"  wrote ...
>>
>>> Actually, "isnuttin" is the best!
>>>
>>> Hmmm, on second thought, it's a tad verbose.
>>>
>>> OK, "aint" it is!
>>>
>>
>>
>> James ought to get some kind of medal for that one ~ it's priceless <g>
>>
>> I'd lay a bet it's part of the Ebonics Computer Science curriculum in
>> Oakland ... (that's "Political Correctness Meets Lunacy" for those who ain't
>> familiar).
> 
> 
> I think in Ebonics it's either "benot" or "beaint", but I'm not certain.

You can't keep up with ebonics, it changes to fast.  The last
approximately close way to express it I can recall is:

if ( null not_bout_it_bout_it hkey )

bout it == about it