unofficial mirror of bug-guile@gnu.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>
To: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
Cc: 14792@debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#14792: Error in manual "(guile-2) Object Properties"
Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 12:37:47 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87siztarok.fsf@tines.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87ehbedwxt.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> (David Kastrup's message of "Thu, 04 Jul 2013 20:03:42 +0200")

Hi David,

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

> The manual states in "Object Properties":
>
>        A single object property created by `make-object-property' can
>     associate distinct property values with all Scheme values that are
>     distinguishable by `eq?' (including, for example, integers).
>
> Integers are not documented to be reliably distinguishable by eq? (which
> means that equal integers might not be eq).

Indeed, good point!

I think we should change object-properties to use 'eqv?' hash operations
instead of 'eq?'.  The only advantage to 'eq?' is a marginal efficiency
benefit, but that's no doubt lost in the noise, not only from the hash
table operations but from the use of fat mutexes.

The only functional difference between Guile's 'eq?' and 'eqv?' is that
'eq?' is not reliable on numbers.  Our manual has been telling people
for years that integers can be used as keys for object properties.
Therefore, we should make it so.  IMO, anyway.

What do other people think?

      Mark





  reply	other threads:[~2013-07-05 16:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-07-04 18:03 bug#14792: Error in manual "(guile-2) Object Properties" David Kastrup
2013-07-05 16:37 ` Mark H Weaver [this message]
2013-07-06 21:21   ` Ludovic Courtès
2013-07-16 15:59     ` Mark H Weaver
2013-07-16 18:46       ` David Kastrup
2013-07-16 18:59         ` Mark H Weaver
2013-07-16 19:30           ` David Kastrup
2013-07-16 19:52             ` Mark H Weaver
2013-07-16 20:01               ` David Kastrup
2013-07-16 18:53       ` Ludovic Courtès
2013-07-27 21:19 ` bug#14792: Actually, this discussion is moot David Kastrup

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87siztarok.fsf@tines.lan \
    --to=mhw@netris.org \
    --cc=14792@debbugs.gnu.org \
    --cc=dak@gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).