[plt-scheme] Native code generation and immutable pairs

From: Felix Klock's PLT scheme proxy (pltscheme at pnkfx.org)
Date: Sun Mar 12 23:47:20 EST 2006


On Mar 11, 2006, at 10:05 AM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:

> On Mar 11, 2006, at 1:20 AM, Jim Blandy wrote:
>> On 3/10/06, Lauri Alanko <la at iki.fi> wrote:
>>> Also, at some point eq? on pairs needs to be unspecified. Once pairs
>>> have no state, they don't need identity, either.
>> I like Henry Baker's paper about this:
>> http://home.pipeline.com/~hbaker1/ObjectIdentity.html
>> It bothers me that the more I think about this stuff, the more I
>> appreciate ML...
> The abstract suggests that what he wrote up in 1990-92 in this  
> essay had been well-known in the Scheme and OpSem community.  
> Indeed, I was teaching
>   (define (my-eq? x y) ... (set-car! x 0) ... (set-car! y 1) ... (=  
> (car y) 1) ...)
> in the freshmen course at Rice back then. My own knowledge goes  
> back to Indiana, probably some Steele-Sussman paper. The op-sem  
> people proved things about this eq? as early as 1986 LiCS (Ian  
> Mason, advised by Carolyn Talcott).
> Computer science, the art of multiple rediscovery.

Also, Gerry Sussman gives a very direct illustration of the idea with  
a pair of pieces of chalk in the SICP videos (circa 1986).

((some links below; the easiest thing to do, for iTunes users at  
least, is to use the feed: link))


Fast foward to maybe four-fifths of the way through and you'll see  
Gerry talking philosophy about two pieces of chalk.  (Yes, it comes  
back to set! and eq? in the end!)


Posted on the users mailing list.