[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Lexical syntax for boxes
>> Anyway, the SRFI needs to say what the behaviour of equal? is for
>> boxes, regardless of whether you adopt vector-like or record-like
> 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.