| From: Vincent Manis <[email protected]>
| Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2012 17:01:54 -0800
|
| On 2012-01-23, at 15:04, John Cowan wrote:
| > In order to allocate a string as an immediate, you also have to
| > prove that it's immutable.
|
| In the absence of a procedure for mutating the length of a string,
| empty strings are immutable.
|
| I guess I'd like to see a use case where it really paid off to define
| (eq? (string) (string)). In the absence of one, I personally don't
| care if the result is unspecified.
If there is only one empty string, then it would be convenient to be
able to match that empty string in a case statement:
(case obj (("") ...))
_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
