If a eq b then I can see your point, as I said, copy and paste is an exception, but if you think that because a == b there for b - a == 0 there for b should be --'ed your logic is faulty because both == and - numifies their arguments and unfortunatly unlike Perl your numification, my numification, and the OP's numification are almost certanly slightly different. So when you return true for a == b I may return false! That is the nature of the human mind. And since in my mind SOPW is about the OP and not me I must grant any respondant the leway that she may be better suited to be on the same wavelengh with the OP than another respondant.

You say these are 'some weird exceptions' but they are not! I gave a link in my post to one example, it was that, one example. It was the first that came to my mind, I have others from my own life that I can't simply super search on them quickly to provide a link here. I think the amount of 'I read this in the documentation or in a book but I don't get what it means' questions here should be proof enough that just because it was explained well once does not mean 100% of readers will get it 100% of the time.

Re: your .sig in relation to this thread. (excuse me if I'm reading too much into it) The world is not a homoginous place, and nither are it's people. There is no 'One True Answer' for all people to any question. There is only the set of all non-false answers to any person. I think it's wonderful the PM for the most part encorages not punishing Another Way To Do It (Even If It's Almost The Same Way) answers.