[R6RS] non-opaque record equality

[dyb at cs.indiana.edu]

> I also propose, however, that this new equiv? predicate
> compare non-opaque records recursively, with guaranteed
> termination.  Then we can define equal? to behave like
> equiv? on records without sacrificing the non-terminating
> behavior of equal? that we have grown to love when equal?
> is used on circular structures that are composed of pairs
> and vectors.

Just to make sure I understand, you're suggesting that equal? recur to
itself on the elements of pairs and vectors but defer entirely to
equiv? for records, so that even if the the fields of the records being
compared contain pairs and vectors, those pairs and vectors are compared
with equiv?.  Right?

Kent