Reference

[Ben Finney]

Marko Rauhamaa <marko at pacujo.net> writes:

> Grant Edwards <invalid at invalid.invalid>:
>
> > Wrong. If the two objects are not the same, then they will have
> > different ID values. If the ID values are the same, then you've only
> > got one object.
>
> Ok, that circularity again.

Yes, it's circular. In an abstract system like a programming language,
where the definition only needs to describe behaviour of that system,
what is your objection to circularity of definition?

A great many abstract systems designed by humans are defined in terms
that are ultimately circular. This does not in any way hinder them from
being useful definitions of useful systems.

-- 
 \        “All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more |
  `\    robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument |
_o__)                                     than others.” —Douglas Adams |
Ben Finney