Daniel Hartwig <mand...@gmail.com> writes:
> On 18 February 2013 17:16, Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> wrote:
>> Quoth R5RS:
>>
>> `Eq?''s behavior on numbers and characters is
>> implementation-dependent, but it will always return either true or
>> false, and will return true only when `eqv?' would also return
>> true. `Eq?' may also behave differently from `eqv?' on empty
>> vectors and empty strings.
>>
>> What we may get wrong is that it looks as if it doesn’t always return
>> either true or false, because the behavior depends on whether one of the
>> operands is a literal.
>
> I took that to mean only that eq? always returns a boolean, rather
> than requiring it to return the same boolean given the same numeric
> arguments. It would be fine to simplify some rationals and not
> others, as this action does not affect the outcome of eqv?.
Yes, this is my understanding as well.
Mark
