Re: [Scheme-reports] Procedural equivalence: the last debate

[Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x>]

On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 9:00 AM, John Cowan <cowan@x> wrote:

Alex Shinn scripsit:

> As I see it, once a procedure escapes, the existence of any semantics
> in the language which can discriminate the procedure location requires
> it to be boxed.  This is true whether the discriminator is eq? or eqv?.

Well, it depends what you mean by "boxed".

I was using "boxed" as a shorthand for the optimization

under discussion, in the same way that Will used it.

The point is that because eqv? can still discern the

location, the optimization is not applicable.  More complex

procedure representations do not change this.

-- 

Alex

_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@x
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports