[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Lexical syntax for boxes

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 111 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 111 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

>> Anyway, the SRFI needs to say what the behaviour of equal? is for
>> boxes, regardless of whether you adopt vector-like or record-like
>> behaviour.
> I don't believe it does need to.  The answer can be left open, as it is
> in R5RS and R7RS-small.  In R6RS, it's defined to be `eqv?`, at least if
> boxes are defined using records, but left open if they are magic.

"saying what the behaviour of equal? is" is not the same as specifying it completely. I am simply asking for language similar to that for records in R7RS. That is, equal? on boxes will return #t if eqv? returns #t but can return #t or #f if eqv? returns #f.

I do think this is the Wrong Thing, and damages Scheme as a functional programming language for little gain, but I lost that argument on records.