Re: S&I's idea of EQ? (OOPS!)

[Kent Dybvig <dyb%indiana.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>]

Yes, I see what you mean.  Here is my real answer to the EQ-Quiz.
Sorry for the slip up...  I went back to edit lower case t's and
f's (because lower case i didn't look right) into upper case T's
and F's and apparently screwed up.

F    (eq? (lambda (x) x) (lambda (y) y))
F    (eqv? (lambda (x) x) (lambda (y) y))
T    (let ((x (lambda (z) z))) (eq? x x))
T    (let ((x (lambda (z) z))) (eqv? x x))
T    (let ((x ... any expression evaluating to an exact number ...))
       (eq? x x))
I    (eq? #\x #\x)

There is one important one to add, by the way:

F    (let ([f (lambda () (lambda (y) y))]) (eq? (f) (f)))

Which right now returns true in Chez Scheme. Sigh...

Kent