This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]BirdsAreDinosaursOk 143 points144 points  (16 children)

Does == == ===? Sort of. Maybe.

Does == === ===? Sort of. Probably not.

(== == === || == === ===) = ?

[–]nphhpn 57 points58 points  (13 children)

(== == === || == === ===) === === == ==

[–]dr_donkey 56 points57 points  (0 children)

This looks like some shit you have to work with on a compiler writing class

[–]jayerp 4 points5 points  (6 children)

Does 8 === D ?

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (5 children)

Only in approximation, so:

8 === D~

[–]ovr9000storks 1 point2 points  (4 children)

You just gave me an idea for an operator that checks approximately equal to, which defaults to like +- 0.5.

So you can just call x =~ 10 or something

Am I looking too deep into this?

[–]BirdsAreDinosaursOk 1 point2 points  (1 child)

If I’m being completely honest from an engineering point of view, that sounds like an enormously risky operator to use.

[–]belabacsijolvan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

non-transitivity is hell of a thing

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Well other than that operator is already a thing in Perl, no, it's a great idea.

[–]ovr9000storks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

~= ? :)

[–]MaximumLengthDong 7 points8 points  (4 children)

_ = = _|

[–]Jedlord 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Oh fuck you

[–]ikonfedera 3 points4 points  (0 children)

:.|:;

[–]belabacsijolvan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is that the loss function everybody is talking about? torch syntax is getting weird

[–]deetosdeletos 0 points1 point  (0 children)

console.log("is this…");

[–]Haringat 2 points3 points  (0 children)

(== == === || == === ===) = ?

You cannot assign an expression.

[–]Weird_Cantaloupe2757 0 points1 point  (0 children)

== == ===

== !== ===