----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Matt Armstrong" <matt / lickey.com>
To: "ruby-talk ML" <ruby-talk / ruby-lang.org>
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 5:28 PM
Subject: Re: Name for #=== based assertion


> Yes, since in English "equivalent" and "equal" are more or less
> equivalent.  ;-)

They may be equivalent, but they're not equal. ;-)*2

Just kidding. I see your point.
 
> From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]:
> 
>   Equivalent \E*quiv"a*lent\, v. t.
>      To make the equivalent to; to equal; equivalence. [R.]

This entry *really* confuses me. A transitive verb????
"A equivalents B." Never heard the like before. Is there
an entry for the adjective?

But in all seriousness, I personally think that "equivalent"
carries a connotation different from "equal." dictionary.com
(FWIW) says "something that is essentially equal to another."
I sumbit they say "essentially" for a reason. They also say
"equal, as in value, force, or meaning" (but they don't say
identity). Also: "having virtually identical or corresponding
parts." (Note "virtually.") However, in fairness, they also
say "Having similar or identical effects" where "identical"
implies more than similarity, but then they are talking about
the "effects" of the thing, not the thing itself.

Feel free to disagree. :) I promise I won't respond if you
do, as the subject rapidly grows silly.

Cheers,
Hal