On Thu, 2006-07-27 at 10:46 -0400, Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress
> > 'exact' has existing semantics of string equality. If we change the
> > semantics of it to equality of any sort, then we have ambiguity between:
> > number exact 1
> > in the two versions.
> Ok if the point is compatibility between versions (a good point, which I
> don't mean to downplay) then use 'match' or find another suitable word.
> Please let's not use 'eq'.
Other than that it has a meaning in perl, what's wrong with eq? (and
that meaning is string equality, not numeric equality which is ==)
Ralph and Ross don't like == and I'm sympathetic to that line of
reasoning (a bug which has bitten me many times as well)
Dr Robert Sanderson
Dept of Computer Science, University of Liverpool