>I completely agree the two *symbols* should be eq? if the language is >set to being case-insensitive. But when you convert the symbols to >strings/unicode, foo has to yield "foo" and FOO has to yield "FOO", the >two strings not being string=? even when the language is set to being >case-insensitive.
Cool! Then Scheme would be like Berkeley Logo in this respect. :-) Seriously, is this why I'm finding John's answer to my question about lexicographic sorting/"normalization" so confusing? Is it the FOLDING part of case folding that's the problem? Could we Unicode-normalize symbols just for the purpose of testing their EQness, but not fold them? I would like that /even better/ than case folding! _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
