Mark H Weaver <m...@netris.org> writes: > Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> writes: > >> On Tue 24 Jan 2012 15:01, Mark H Weaver <m...@netris.org> writes: >> >>> `local-eval' combines syntax objects from two different sessions into a >>> single syntax object (in the wrapper procedure), and thus there may be >>> label name collisions. Now, if this combined syntax object is >>> serialized as a compiled procedure, these labels with the same name will >>> be optimized together into the same string object! >> >> A very good point! >> >> Cf. Aziz's psyntax/expander.ss from r6rs-libraries.dev: >> >> ;;; (two marks must be eq?-comparable, so we use a string >> ;;; of one char (this assumes that strings are mutable)). >> >> ;;; gen-mark generates a new unique mark >> (define (gen-mark) ;;; faster >> (string #\m))
Dingdingding. That sounds to me like I am not the only person of the opinion that (eq? (string) (string)) is a standard-compliant implementation choice. I know this was a different discussion altogether but thought it might be worth pointing out. -- David Kastrup
