|Version 1 (modified by cowan, 4 years ago) (diff)|
Notes about Results
WG1 Ballot Items To Finalize By Jul. 6
WG1 - Core
#125 Allow procedures not to be locations (making EQV? unspecified in some additional cases)
- Options: r6rs, r5rs, undecided
- Default: r5rs
- Results: r5rs
By unanimous consent, the WG returned to the R5RS semantics.
#467 Allow eqv? and eq? to return different answers on procedures as well as integers and characters
This proposal stems from remarks by Alaric Snell-Pym and Will Clinger on the r6rs public mailing list. If eq? is allowed to return #f on two procedures when eqv? nevertheless returns #t, as is already the case for numbers and characters, then more intelligent implementation-specific procedure comparisons using eqv? are possible, while still keeping eq? simple enough to inline easily.
Note that this is orthogonal to the question of #460, how eqv? works on procedures. There should be little or no backward-compatibility hit for this change.
- same: eq? and eqv? always return the same on procedures, per R5RS and R6RS
- different: eq? may return #f on procedures even when eqv? returns #t (but not vice versa)
- Options: same, different, undecided
- Default: same
- Results: different
By unanimous consent, the WG adopted the following partial definition of the behavior of eq? on procedures:
On procedures, eq? must return true if the arguments' location tags are equal.