[R6RS] `eqv?' on immutable records

[Michael Sperber]

"R. Kent Dybvig" <dyb at cs.indiana.edu> writes:

>> This means you'd prefer this:
>>
>> (eqv? '(a) '(a)) => #f
>
> No.  As I said:
>
>> I'm okay with allowing constants to be commonized, so, for example:
>> ...
>>   (eq? '(a) '(a)) ;=> #t or #f
>
> That is, it's okay with me if the evaluator allocates only one copy of the
> quoted (a) if it appears in multiple places within a program.

Sorry for missing this.

I don't really understand your underlying position: You want to allow
the compiler to mess with object identity of quote expressions that are
distinct in the source program, but not for constants as they get
implicitly propagated by the compiler?

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