[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Morally equivalent
From: |
Emanuel Berg |
Subject: |
Re: Morally equivalent |
Date: |
Tue, 18 Oct 2022 03:07:39 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) |
Michael Heerdegen wrote:
> Good point. It's just about an implementation detail.
> In other docstrings we just say "equivalent but produces
> slightly more efficient code" or simply "equivalent".
>
> Or has anyone ever used a place expression (whose getter)
> has side effects? Relying on that would probably uncover one
> hundred and five bugs.
>
> So - to lead this to some end - is there someone not
> agreeing that we could just say "equivalent"?
Agreed, but can we also drop "slightly"?
--
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal
- Re: Morally equivalent, (continued)
- Re: Morally equivalent, Thibaut Verron, 2022/10/17
- Re: Morally equivalent, Rudolf Adamkovič, 2022/10/17
- Re: Morally equivalent, Michael Heerdegen, 2022/10/17
- Re: Morally equivalent, Po Lu, 2022/10/17
- Re: Morally equivalent, Michael Heerdegen, 2022/10/17
- Re: Morally equivalent, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/10/18
- Re: Morally equivalent, Christopher Dimech, 2022/10/18
- Re: Morally equivalent, Emanuel Berg, 2022/10/19
- Re: Morally equivalent, Akib Azmain Turja, 2022/10/20
- Re: Morally equivalent, Christopher Dimech, 2022/10/20
- Re: Morally equivalent,
Emanuel Berg <=
- Re: Morally equivalent, Christopher Dimech, 2022/10/17
- Re: Morally equivalent, Alessandro Bertulli, 2022/10/17
Re: Morally equivalent, Will Mengarini, 2022/10/23