Semantics of Equals (was: Re: Question about checks for min and max values)

[Kenneth Brody]

Quoting Jay R. Ashworth (Mon, 25 Jul 2005 15:02:33 -0400):

> On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 02:50:43PM -0400, Nancy Palmquist wrote:
[...]
> > I don't think that filePro misunderstands the difference, it is the
> > programming communitity that is not clear on the difference.  I
> > disagree that filepro is wrong.
>
> You're welcome to disagree all you like.  You're also welcome to
> inspect the behavior of the "==" operator (the replacement for "=" as a
> comparison operator in many languages to avoid accidental assignment in
> a context where comparison is desired) in substantially *every* extant
> procedural programming language.

Yet, from a previous message in this thread, you replied:

  > > How do those languages represent a number without any value?
  >
  > To the best of my knowledge and belief, none of them admit of the
  > concept of "a number without any value".

So, if these languages have no concept of "a number without any value",
how can you use them as an example of how filePro's behavior is "wrong"?

> I believe you'll find it... instructive.

Hmmm.....

==========
#include <stdio.h>

int main(int argc, char *argv[])
    {
    char string1[] = "This is a string";
    char string2[] = "This is a string";

    if ( string1 == string2 )
        printf("They are equal.\n");
    else
        printf("They are not equal.\n");

    return(0);
    }
==========

:-)

--
KenBrody at BestWeb dot net        spamtrap: <g8ymh8uf001 at sneakemail.com>
http://www.hvcomputer.com
http://www.fileProPlus.com