[r6rs-discuss] immutable hash tables and eqv?
sperber at informatik.uni-tuebingen.de
Mon May 28 03:59:06 EDT 2007
Abdulaziz Ghuloum <aghuloum at cs.indiana.edu> writes:
> On May 24, 2007, at 1:02 PM, R. Kent Dybvig wrote:
>> I think this decision to (un)specify eqv? in this manner was a mistake
>> and hope we can agree to fix the mistake.
> Actually, given that eqv? and eq? are completely unspecified
> for immutable pairs, I don't see how even simple procedures
> like list? can be implemented portably in a straightforward
> manner. The definition of list? in TSPL[*] is not guaranteed
> to work when passed an immutable list of length 2 or greater.
That's actually an omission in the report, and easily fixed. (Two pairs
cannot be eq? or eqv? if the cars or cdrs aren't eq?/eqv?.) I'll try to
do better for the next draft.
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla
More information about the r6rs-discuss