> Sorry, if you're usign *any* immutable value there and expecting it to > be a unique object, you're cruisin' for a bruisin', so to speak. The > language spec explicitly *allows* but does not *require* the > implementation to cache and reuse immutable values. Ay, there's the rub. Aren't you saying that using "is" to compare immutables is always broken, unless you know that the immutable values are singletons?
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4