[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) writes: > > What was the reason to not have `list-equal?'? Was it the fact that we > want it to be inlined within `equal?'?
You should hide it please. I think different equality test funcs are generally exposed only when they do something different from plain `equal?'. Like `list=' from srfi-1 that lets you do a shallow list compare. > + (pass-if "equal?" > + ;; Although SRFI-9 does not require that two record instances be > + ;; `equal?' in such cases, it is a highly desirable feature. > + (let ((first (make-foo (string-copy "hello"))) > + (second (make-foo (string-copy "hello")))) > + (set-y! first (string-copy "world")) > + (set-y! second (string-copy "world")) > + (equal? first second)))) I think that test would be better in some other test file, either a conglomerate boot-9.test or maybe a records.test. srfi-9.test only needs to exercise things srfi-9 specifies. _______________________________________________ Guile-user mailing list Guile-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-user