[R6RS] `eqv?' on immutable records

[Michael Sperber]

Anton van Straaten <anton at appsolutions.com> writes:

> But I also wonder if it's too late to try to make any major change given 
> the current schedule.

I don't think it would be a major change, given that the current/R5RS
semantics is so obscure.

> E.g. what would the impact on the formal semantics be?

Well, location tags are needed for mutable objects anyway.  I'm not sure
if it's grown the "immutable" flag I asked for a long time ago, but I'll
check tomorrow.  In either case, it shouldn't be a problem.

-- 
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla