From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>
Cc: 14792@debbugs.gnu.org, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
Subject: bug#14792: Error in manual "(guile-2) Object Properties"
Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2013 23:21:19 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87wqp3mlkg.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87siztarok.fsf@tines.lan> (Mark H. Weaver's message of "Fri, 05 Jul 2013 12:37:47 -0400")
Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org> skribis:
> 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?
Associating object properties with numbers doesn’t seem useful to me, so
my inclination would be to fix the manual, FWIW.
Ludo’.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-06 21:21 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
2013-07-06 21:21 ` Ludovic Courtès [this message]
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=87wqp3mlkg.fsf@gnu.org \
--to=ludo@gnu.org \
--cc=14792@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=dak@gnu.org \
--cc=mhw@netris.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).