Re: [Scheme-reports] [r6rs-discuss] Scheme pattern matching: the case for (case)

[John Cowan <cowan@x>]

Per Bothner scripsit:

> "Problem" is a strange word in this context - that eqv? was defined
> as equal? is irrelevant to what is happening (at least for Kawa).
> The reason the result is #t is that (as you mention elsewhere):
> implementations are free to make literal strings eqv? if they have
> the same content.

Oops, I forgot to control for that.  The jury will disregard what I said.

-- 
Real FORTRAN programmers can program FORTRAN    John Cowan
in any language.  --Ed Post                     cowan@x

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