[r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Unclear how equality predicates behave on NaN

[John Cowan]

Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk scripsit:

> Ok. But currently R6RS doesn't guarantee that (eqv? x x) when x
> is NaN, and it should.

True.  Indeed, it should guarantee that on Leibnitzian grounds
(the identity of indiscernibles) for x of any type whatsoever.

-- 
One Word to write them all,             John Cowan <cowan at ccil.org>
  One Access to find them,              http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
One Excel to count them all,
  And thus to Windows bind them.                --Mike Champion