Re: [Scheme-reports] [r6rs-discuss] Scheme pattern matching: the case for (case)
John Cowan 22 Dec 2010 20:41 UTC
Per Bothner scripsit:
> "Problem" is a strange word in this context - that eqv? was defined
> as equal? is irrelevant to what is happening (at least for Kawa).
> The reason the result is #t is that (as you mention elsewhere):
> implementations are free to make literal strings eqv? if they have
> the same content.
Oops, I forgot to control for that. The jury will disregard what I said.
--
Real FORTRAN programmers can program FORTRAN John Cowan
in any language. --Ed Post cowan@ccil.org
_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports