This site is a static rendering of the Trac instance that was used by R7RS-WG1 for its work on R7RS-small (PDF), which was ratified in 2013. For more information, see Home.

Ticket 423: Formal Comment: The list of cases where `eqv?` returns `#t` does not mention procedures

2012-10-12 03:15:38
WG1 - Core
cowan
major
cowan
wontfix
source
closed
2012-06-28 12:16:15
defect

Submitter's name: Richard Kelsey

Submitter's email: kelsey at s48.org

Relevant draft: r7rs draft 6

Type: defect

Priority: major

Relevant section of draft: Equivalence predicates

Summary: The list of cases where eqv? returns #t does not mention procedures.

Several of the eqv? examples have eqv? returning #t when comparing procedures. Eq? is required to behave identically to eqv? on procedures, and one eq? example returns #t when comparing procedures.

I suggest that you go back to R5RS's notion of having procedures tagged with locations.

If the location tags are not used, then either come up with some other was to tell when two procedures are the same or change the eqv? and eq? examples so that no procedure comparison returns #t. Also, the formal semantics needs to be changed, as it still has a location as part of a procedure value and uses that location in its definition of eqv?.

summaryFormal Comment:Formal Comment: The list of cases where `eqv?` returns `#t` does not mention procedures
owneralexshinncowan
statusnewaccepted
resolutionwontfix
statusacceptedclosed