Scheme language standardization process
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/01/2012 10:38 AM, John Cowan wrote: > Draft 6 requires that `equal?` recursively descend into records. However, > the WG did not explicitly vote for this feature, nor is it mentioned > in SRFI 9, which is our source document for records. In addition, > R6RS explicitly forbids it, requiring that all objects except pairs, > vectors, strings, and bytevectors be compared with `eqv?`. I think that R6 is logically inconsistent in this point, and that the prohibition is probably due to an oversight rather than due to a decision. If it requires pairs, vectors, and strings. to be recursively compared, then it is not sensible to require records *not* to be recursively compared. The obvious implementation technique for any problem you'd use records for, in fact, if you don't have records, *NECESSARILY* uses one of the types that 'equal?' recursively compares. Bear -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPT8q4AAoJEAOzWkqOibfN1dMH/27BT68mohSeuiWbU3vEjt9Y em4Eh7AeZT0De35rKLXmtuf7P/ew/5niFT39js8hy4VFS1YuNAaJ412YbWKvAOck BM4BKzFFuei/3Y0N5jVO1Aj/82dELCOHohIqJ1Ay+M5gYIc71sAjnMcOO0DNarv2 +YF1BiM8B8jj11wMhST2kaObXTiy/1RP0DX9nuhsSS+i2qd8N11wn5rRoIAQxeQq g78fSwM/e/QIMnydyiPKDwEuQ14ggUAE63xm0NXBCxITXWB5Luur/ejNX2Niwq7w K9N9s3031gCyCaVtmcsZtxU10kAwTHBewXZKWxbghrnsrCR/ny5y1hqT4Ll3Ufg= =QZ69 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list Scheme-reports@x http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports