Draft proposal: allow the use of relational operators on Comparable classes (original) (raw)

rssh at gradsoft.com.ua rssh at gradsoft.com.ua
Tue Mar 10 16:57:53 PDT 2009

In languages with both == and ===, the == is more like .equals(), and the === is more like java's ==. Making them the reverse in java is a really really bad idea. I'd far rather have a way to specify that you're on 'new mode' java, and have == imply equals, and remove object identity altogether; it's just not a relevant operation. Shove it off to a java.lang library call. That's what we did with System.arrayCopy too, and that was clearly a good idea.

This will break a lot of code. Better find better symbol :)

--Reinier Zwitserloot Like it? Tip it! http://tipit.to

On Mar 11, 2009, at 00:51, rssh at gradsoft.com.ua wrote:

IMHO, would have sense with addition of symbol for equality check: ('===' ?)

I've attached a draft of a proposal to allow classes which implement the Comparable interface to be used as operands for the relational operators. So for example if you had two Strings, a and b, you would be able to write if (a < b) { ... } instead of if (a.compareTo(b) < 0) { ... } and you could do the same with your own classes as well. Thanks in advance for any feedback, Vil.

More information about the coin-dev mailing list