After a vote by the WG recorded at <http://trac.sacrideo.us/wg/wiki/WG1Ballot6Results>, the WG affirmed its previous stance, allowing implementations of `eqv?` to return either `#t` or `#f` on procedures. The WG further voted to allow `eq?` to return `#f` on procedures even if `eqv?` returns `#t` on the same procedures.
This provides the maximum flexibility for implementers to duplicate and/or merge procedures as seems desirable. However, it is still guaranteed that if two procedures are operationally distinguishable, `eqv?` must return `#f` on them. Therefore, the Formal Comment is rejected. -- LEAR: Dost thou call me fool, boy? John Cowan FOOL: All thy other titles http://www.ccil.org/~cowan thou hast given away: [email protected] That thou wast born with. _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
