From: Zelphir Kaltstahl <zelphirkaltstahl@posteo.de>
To: Guile User <guile-user@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Surprising behavior of eq?
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2020 14:19:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8e1d9874-4659-cca5-03da-c2c0df102c56@posteo.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c662512f-c5fb-b7c5-071b-4fe11bc87229@posteo.de>
Sorry, I misclicked "send" when I wanted to further edit my e-mail ...
My Guile version is:
~~~~
(version)
$6 = "3.0.4"
~~~~
On 20.09.20 14:16, Zelphir Kaltstahl wrote:
>
> Hello Guile users,
>
> I just noticed something weird about eq?.
>
> My Guile version is:
>
>
> I get the different results, depending on whether I define some
> bindings in a let or using define:
>
> (In Emacs Geiser:)
>
> ~~~~
> (define x '(10 9))
> (define y '(10 9))
> (eq? x y)
> $2 = #f
>
> (let ([x '(10 9)]
> [y '(10 9)])
> (eq? x y))
> $3 = #t
> ~~~~
>
> Is this intentional or a bug?
>
> I first noticed something strange when writing the following code:
>
> ~~~~DEFINITION~~~~
> (define make-multiple-list-remover
> (λ (equal-proc)
> (λ (lst unwanted)
> (let loop ([remaining-list lst])
> (cond
> [(null? remaining-list)
> '()]
> [(equal-proc (car remaining-list) unwanted)
> (loop (cdr remaining-list))]
> [else
> (cons (car remaining-list)
> (loop (cdr remaining-list)))])))))
> ~~~~
>
> ~~~~TEST~~~~
> (let ([a '(9 10)]
> [b '(9 10)])
> (test-equal "make-multiple-list-remover-03"
> `(1 2 (3) (4) ,a)
> ((make-multiple-list-remover eq?)
> `(a b (c) (d) ,a) b)))
> ~~~~
>
> I was wondering, why the test fails. I think (eq? ...) should not be
> able to see the equivalence of both lists a and b, just like when
> defined using (define ...).
>
> I can also run it in the REPL and see the difference:
>
> ~~~~
> (define a '(9 10))
> (define b '(9 10))
> ((make-multiple-list-remover eq?)
> `(a b (c) (d) ,a) b)
> $4 = (a b (c) (d) (9 10))
>
> (let ([a '(9 10)]
> [b '(9 10)])
> ((make-multiple-list-remover eq?)
> `(a b (c) (d) ,a) b))
> $5 = (a b (c) (d))
> ~~~~
>
> Somehow the bindings of let seem to be different from the bindings
> created using define. What about using define inside let?
>
> ~~~~
>
> ~~~~
> --
> repositories: https://notabug.org/ZelphirKaltstahl
Somehow the bindings of let seem to be different from the bindings
created using define. What about using define inside let?
~~~~
(let ([unrelated 'bla])
(define a '(9 10))
(define b '(9 10))
((make-multiple-list-remover eq?)
`(a b (c) (d) ,a) b))
$7 = (a b (c) (d))
~~~~
So there the define usage also differs from when I use define on the top
level. Perhaps that is the difference? On which level the bindings are
defined?
Regards,
Zelphir
--
repositories: https://notabug.org/ZelphirKaltstahl
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-20 12:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-20 12:16 Surprising behavior of eq? Zelphir Kaltstahl
2020-09-20 12:19 ` Zelphir Kaltstahl [this message]
2020-09-20 12:58 ` Christopher Lemmer Webber
2020-09-20 13:09 ` Zelphir Kaltstahl
2020-09-20 13:52 ` John Cowan
2020-09-20 15:37 ` Zelphir Kaltstahl
2020-09-20 16:18 ` tomas
2020-09-20 17:05 ` John Cowan
2020-09-20 20:51 ` Linus Björnstam
2020-09-20 21:42 ` John Cowan
2020-09-20 13:57 ` Stefan Schmiedl
2020-09-20 15:42 ` Zelphir Kaltstahl
2020-09-20 17:26 ` Taylan Kammer
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=8e1d9874-4659-cca5-03da-c2c0df102c56@posteo.de \
--to=zelphirkaltstahl@posteo.de \
--cc=guile-user@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).