Re: proposal to make null string handling more emacs-y
From:
PJ Weisberg
Subject:
Re: proposal to make null string handling more emacs-y
Date:
Sun, 29 Apr 2012 12:51:26 -0700
On Sunday, April 29, 2012, Andreas Röhler <address@hidden> wrote: > Am 29.04.2012 19:08, schrieb Drew Adams: >>>> >>>> (string= nil "")
>>> >>> (if "" >>> (message "%s" "empty string proved true") >>> (message "%s" "empty string proved false")) >>> ==> "empty string proved true"
>> >> "" is not equal or eq or eql to nil. >> But "" is string= to nil. >> >> > > in other words said: > > if the empty list is nil, why the empty string should yield true?
> > for me > > (equal nil "")==> t > > would be plausible
Think of it as converting nil to a string when necessary. `string=' requires strings, so nil is treated as "". `equal' doesn't require strings, so nil is treated as nil.
-- -PJ
Gehm's Corollary to Clark's Law: Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.