Am So., 9. Apr. 2023 um 22:42 Uhr schrieb John Cowan <[email protected]>: > > > > On Sun, Apr 9, 2023 at 4:33 PM Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> > After "the same record" add "(in the sense of `equal?`)". >> >> "In the sense of equal?" would be wrong. It is the same sameness as >> between (1 . ()) and (1). > > > Just so: the result of reading "(1 . ())" is the same (in the sense of > `equal?`) to the result of reading "(1)". If you just write "the same", it > suggests that they might be the same in the sense of eq?, which is wrong.
For records (at least R6RS records), equal? and eqv? have the same behavior. >From the output of the reader, it is indistinguishable whether (1 . ()) or (1) was seen. This is independent of equal?-ness (or non-equal?-ness). > You should also point out that a record literal is immutable, even if the > fields of the record type claim to be mutable. This follows from the general text for constants, but I can add it if you think it is more helpful than superfluous.
