[hn_throwaway_99]

Pretty hard disagree. There are fundamentally different definitions of "equal", and pretty much all languages I can think of support that (e.g. reference equality vs. Object.equals in Java).

You can argue that triple equals is a confusing syntax, but the underlying problem is inherent in the world we live in.

[giantrobot]

> You can argue that triple equals is a confusing syntax

To me this is the problem with triple equals. The different types of equality should be explicit in their use rather than overloading a sigil.

[flir]

Shouldn't that logic also apply to ==, which overloads the assignment operator (=) in the same way?

[hn_throwaway_99]

Very much agree with this one, but would phrase it as using = to represent assignment was the bad original choice.

[giantrobot]

If the average keyboard had support, characters like ≡ could be used as the equivalence sigil and ≢ for not equivalent.