Re: Why a separate isequal?

[Daniel J Sebald]

On 03/09/2014 10:03 PM, David Spies wrote:
> I noticed that:
>
> octave:1> isequal(1,2)
> ans =  1
>
> I'm guessing this is a bug.  Nonetheless, why is there even a separate
> isequal function?  Why can't it just be defined as
>
> function [res] = isequal(a,b)
>    res = (a == b)
> endfunction
>
> Are there types for which it's meant to differ from ==?  Is this
> supposed to be used for some sort of test?

According to the documentation, isequal accepts a general tuple:

> > isequal(5,5,5)
ans =  1
> > 5 == 5 == 5
ans = 0

Why it is failing on your system is a good question.  Seems like a basic 
function that shouldn't have changed much.

What does

> > test isequal
PASSES 23 out of 23 tests

produce for you?

Dan