Re: [r6rs-discuss] [Scheme-reports] redefining eqv?
Adrien "Pied" Piérard 24 Dec 2010 11:49 UTC
And now comes a question from a user who reads all your debates in
awe, but can't help thinking there's a lot of hair splitting involved.
"Why not just parameterize CASE or whatever pattern-matcher with an
equivalence predicate?"
Wouldn't this solve many problems we read here?
Would it create enough others problems to be disqualified?
I believe that
(case-with my-equality-predicate foo
((bar) quux)
(else rofl)))
(I hope my intervention is not too off topic…)
Cheers.
--
Français, English, 日本語, 한국어
_______________________________________________
r6rs-discuss mailing list
r6rs-discuss@lists.r6rs.org
http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss