Talk:Z13052

consider Z18683

I think some of the tests (and maybe some implementations) should move to strict object equality (Z18683). --99of9 (talk) 06:18, 22 July 2025 (UTC)

Maybe. The function’s label is misleading because the function considers equality of objects when converted to Python to be definitive, even when the Wikifunctions objects themselves are not equivalent. It seems to follow that any test case that fails for object equality, python == (Z13166) should be disconnected or revised to reflect the “Truth” according to Python.

An alternative Truth is represented by strict equality, reified objects are equal lists (Z26486) (barring defects in Z805). There are alternative degrees of strictness, but the general rule (in my opinion) is that test cases for Z18683 should be aligned to the results from that implementation.

It seems to me that object equality, using Type's equality function (Z26473) offers a third version of the Truth, according to which the absence of a connected equality function for a Type is equivalent to False. Perhaps it might be better to consider such a case to be “undecidable” (and I would be inclined to use a type-specific equality function when comparing lists, for consistency). In any event, if it is intended to differ meaningfully from either of the existing functions’ versions of the “Truth”, it should be the implementation of a different function (something like “same comparable objects”, perhaps). GrounderUK (talk) 10:07, 22 July 2025 (UTC)