[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Wed, 05 Mar 2014 22:23:46 +0200, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:

> Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info>:
>> There is no metaphysical implication from Python's "is" operator. If
>> the operator had precisely the same behaviour, but was called "same",
>> as in:
>> a same b
>> => returns True if a and b are the same object => returns False if a
>> and b are not the same object
>> would you claim there was a metaphysical implication?
> I would. You are not defining anything because you are not explaining
> what "same object" means.

I mean exactly the same thing by "same object" as you do when you use it:

> Set theory obeys the so-called extensionality principle: if two objects
> are indistinguishable in every way, they are one and the same object.

Steven D'Aprano