From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Mark H Weaver Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.bugs Subject: bug#13741: guile-2.0: optimize, and eq-ness of literals (test-suite) Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 18:48:42 -0500 Message-ID: <87ip5pnpyd.fsf@tines.lan> References: <87621q8fo4.fsf@gmail.com> <87k3q67zhy.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1361231408 8052 80.91.229.3 (18 Feb 2013 23:50:08 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 23:50:08 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 13741@debbugs.gnu.org To: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Original-X-From: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 19 00:50:30 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-bugs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1U7aTd-0003rx-Qq for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 19 Feb 2013 00:50:29 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33117 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U7aTJ-0001wK-JA for guile-bugs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 18:50:09 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:37228) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U7aTC-0001lf-Qu for bug-guile@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 18:50:07 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U7aTA-0008Mq-Fw for bug-guile@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 18:50:01 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:58158) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U7aTA-0008Mk-Ck for bug-guile@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 18:50:00 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1U7aU9-00034P-Rk for bug-guile@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 18:51:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Mark H Weaver Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-guile@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 23:51:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 13741 X-GNU-PR-Package: guile X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 13741-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B13741.136123142011753 (code B ref 13741); Mon, 18 Feb 2013 23:51:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 13741) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Feb 2013 23:50:20 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35389 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1U7aTQ-00033R-KE for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 18:50:20 -0500 Original-Received: from world.peace.net ([96.39.62.75]:49707) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1U7aTL-00033H-Oq for 13741@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 18:50:15 -0500 Original-Received: from 74-94-165-125-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.94.165.125] helo=tines.lan) by world.peace.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1U7aSF-0007mC-HJ; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 18:49:03 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87k3q67zhy.fsf@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Court\=C3\=A8s\=22'\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?s\?\= message of "Mon, 18 Feb 2013 10:16:57 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-guile@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GUILE, GNU's Ubiquitous Extension Language" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-guile-bounces+guile-bugs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.bugs:6747 Archived-At: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: > However, it=E2=80=99s fundamentally wrong to rely on eq? to compare numbe= rs. So > the test case you mention seems buggy, to start with. Agreed. I removed the buggy test. Thanks, Mark