[plt-scheme] Procedure equality

On Apr 30, 2009, at 9:00 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:

> On Apr 30, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>>
>> On Apr 30, 2009, at 8:26 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
>>>
>>> This is correct for many dialects of Scheme, including standard
>>> dialects. But in PLT Scheme, `(let ([x <expr>]) (eq? x x))'
>>> produces #t for any `<expr>'.
>>
>> It is my distinct impression that Aziz's proposed inlining violates
>> some report's notion of eq? i.e. some standard. Will would know.
>> (Then again, I really don't care. Ptr equality on functions is iffy
>> and when you program with it you get what the compiler gives you.)
>
> Not a standard, but Kent's Macro Writer's Bill of Rights lists
>
>   (eq? x x) --> #t

Thanks. I am possibly confused ...