Am Sa., 10. Sept. 2022 um 12:36 Uhr schrieb John Cowan <[email protected]>:
> > > On Sat, Sep 10, 2022 at 3:30 AM Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen < > [email protected]> wrote: > > >> My initial comment that it can return `#t` on all procedures was in >> the context of your Chicken implementation where all procedures are >> tagged (possibly with some unspecified value). > > > Ah, I didn't understand that. > I should have been clearer in the beginning then. > But I do not read Chicken's native system as meaning that all procedures > are tagged. In particular, (procedure-data 5) also returns #f, but not > because 5 is a tagged procedure. > SRFI 229 does not completely define the set of tagged procedures, so both views are possible: That in Chicken every procedure is tagged (in the sense of SRFI 229, often with a tag just being #f) or the different view, which is yours. > > (In R6RS, an assertion violation would be raised per section 5.4 of the >> report.) > > > I have modified my implementation of procedure-tag to call > extended-procedure? and signal an error if it returns #f. > Thanks for your implementation. I am looking forward to seeing it included by Arthur.
