On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 13:09:00 +0000 Nicholas Clark <nick@ccl4.org> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 11:55:00AM +0100, Paul "LeoNerd" Evans wrote: > > The behaviour in perl's `eq` operator is exposed to XS authors via > > > > BOOL sv_eq(SV *left, SV *right); > > > > Nice and simple. > > That's not quite accurate. Overloaded comparison is handled one level > out: > > PP(pp_seq) > { > dSP; > tryAMAGICbin_MG(seq_amg, 0); > { > dPOPTOPssrl; > SETs(boolSV(sv_eq_flags(left, right, 0))); > RETURN; > } > } Ah, yes I was aware of that but I didn't explain that in the email. > That's probably sane, but: > 1) What sv_eq_flags() is a better API > 2) And if it isn't, it would be better if we exposed consistent API Yes good ideas there - an sv_numeq_flags() would be better. -- Paul "LeoNerd" Evans leonerd@leonerd.org.uk | https://metacpan.org/author/PEVANS http://www.leonerd.org.uk/ | https://www.tindie.com/stores/leonerd/Thread Previous