Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL Helmut Eller (14 Nov 2012 08:51 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL Alex Shinn (14 Nov 2012 09:07 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL Helmut Eller (14 Nov 2012 09:13 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL Alex Shinn (14 Nov 2012 09:26 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL Helmut Eller (14 Nov 2012 10:22 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL Marc Feeley (14 Nov 2012 21:06 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL John Cowan (14 Nov 2012 21:26 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL Marc Feeley (14 Nov 2012 22:05 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL Alex Shinn (14 Nov 2012 23:46 UTC)
[Scheme-reports] equal? Alan Watson (15 Nov 2012 00:40 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] equal? Jim Rees (15 Nov 2012 02:36 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] equal? John Cowan (15 Nov 2012 16:26 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] equal? Alan Watson (15 Nov 2012 16:35 UTC)
Re: equal? Arthur A. Gleckler (17 Nov 2012 20:32 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL John Cowan (15 Nov 2012 16:23 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL Aaron W. Hsu (15 Nov 2012 23:47 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL Shiro Kawai (16 Nov 2012 01:16 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL Per Bothner (14 Nov 2012 21:37 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL Marc Feeley (14 Nov 2012 21:49 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL Andy Wingo (04 Jan 2013 13:02 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL John Cowan (04 Jan 2013 15:42 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL Alaric Snell-Pym (04 Jan 2013 16:30 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL Helmut Eller (15 Nov 2012 07:44 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL John Cowan (15 Nov 2012 16:04 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] REPL Per Bothner (15 Nov 2012 16:17 UTC)

[Scheme-reports] equal? Alan Watson 15 Nov 2012 00:35 UTC

> (equal? obj1 obj2) procedure
>
> The equal? procedure, when applied to pairs, vectors, strings and bytevectors, recursively compares them, returning #t when the unfoldings of its arguments into (possibly infinite) trees are equal as ordered trees, and #f otherwise. It returns the same as eqv? when applied to booleans, symbols, numbers, characters, ports, procedures, and the empty list. If two objects are eqv?, they must be equal? as well. In all other cases, equal? may return either #t or #f.

What, precisely, does it mean to say that the "trees are equal". I suggest:

"returning #t when the unfoldings of its arguments into (possibly infinite) trees are equal as ordered trees, with corresponding leaves being compared by equal?, and #f otherwise"

There may well be better ways to say this. Alternatively, I think one could say that the leafs are compared by eqv? (since structure has been unfolded).

Regards,

Alan
_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports