Marco Antoniotti <marcoxa@cs.nyu.edu> writes:
Hi
I created a Google form to vote on the name...
Cheers
Marco
Begin forwarded message:
From: marcoxa@gmail.com Date: February 16, 2011 9:58:50 AM GMT+01:00 To: marcoxa@cs.nyu.edu Subject: Names for the equality generic function
If you have trouble viewing or submitting this form, you can fill it out online: https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?formkey=dDFZSTJ4OTlCTlNaQlc3YlhUNjA...
Names for the equality generic function
What name should be used for the generic function "equality"? * □ ( ) EQUALITY □ ( ) EQUIV □ ( ) EQUP □ ( ) EQUALS □ ( ) == □ ( ) EQUIVALENT □ ( ) AEQUALIS □ ( ) SAMEP □ ( ) EQUIVP
I voted for EQUALS. It should be in length at least more than EQUAL. EQUAL shows that it doesn't necessarily needs the -P postfix. EQUALS being of same length as EQUALP shows that (equals x y) <= (equalp x y) doesn't need to hold. On the other hand, we should have: (equals x y) <= (equal x y) AEQUALIS was nice, but let's keep CL English. I definitely reject EQUIVALENT and similar, because equivalence is a different notion n what I think is wanted with this equality generic function. -- __Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/ A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.