GNU bug report logs - #14792
Error in manual "(guile-2) Object Properties"

Previous Next

Package: guile;

Reported by: David Kastrup <dak <at> gnu.org>

Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2013 18:05:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: patch

Merged with 18223

Done: Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org>
Cc: 14792 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, David Kastrup <dak <at> gnu.org>
Subject: bug#14792: Error in manual "(guile-2) Object Properties"
Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2013 23:21:19 +0200
Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org> skribis:

> David Kastrup <dak <at> 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’.




This bug report was last modified 10 years and 343 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.