[r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Make unspecified return values of eq? / eqv? unspecified

From: John Cowan <cowan>
Date: Sat Jan 27 12:09:43 2007

Michael Sperber scripsit:

> Allow implementations to return other values than #t or #f for the
> unspecified cases, and also allow them to abort the program or raise
> an exception for those cases.

Since everything that is not #f is true, I would be very unhappy with
eq?/eqv?/equal? versions that could return other things. Allowing
them to throw an exception would be fine.

-- 
John Cowan  http://ccil.org/~cowan  cowan_at_ccil.org
All "isms" should be "wasms".   --Abbie
Received on Sat Jan 27 2007 - 12:09:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Wed Oct 23 2024 - 09:15:01 UTC