[r6rs-discuss] immutable hash tables and eqv?

[Michael Sperber]

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