Hi Andy! Andy Wingo <wi...@igalia.com> skribis:
> On Thu 20 Feb 2020 17:19, Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> writes: > >> Of all the scm_tc7_ values listed in ‘scm.h’, the following are not >> explicitly listed (so they go to the default case that hashes the first >> word): > > Reformatting your list so I can check one by one :) > >> variable, >> hashtable, >> fluid, >> dynamic_state, >> frame, >> atomic_box, >> program, >> vm_cont, >> weak_set, >> weak_table, >> port > > No equal? implementation, so should hashq() instead. > >> bytevector, >> array, >> bitvector, > > These have equal? implementations, and what's more, a bitvector can > equal? an array... I think we have another bug! > > ;; Project 2d array as 1d array (scm_tc7_array) > (define x > (make-shared-array #2b((#t #t #t)) (lambda (i) (list 0 i)) '(0 2))) > ;; scm_tc7_bitvector > (define y #*111) > > (equal? x y) ;; => #t > (equal? (hash x #xffffffff) (hash y #xffffffff)) ;; => #f > > Similarly for 1-d scm_tc7_array versus regular vectors, bytevectors, > etc. Oops. > Fixing this will not be straightforward... I think basically 1d arrays > need some special hashing logic so that e.g. vectors and 1d arrays hash > to the same thing. OK. >> stringbuf, >> values, > > These are never exposed to Scheme, and never compared using equal? > AFAIU. No need for special cases. Agreed. > Basically I think the tc7 case should default to hashq, and include > special cases for the ones that have equal? implementations or which > have read syntax. > > Sound right to you? It does, yes. Thanks for looking into it, Ludo’.
