1) you meant srf-133, not srf-113...

2) You also need to remove the (or (eq? vector-a vector-b) ...) from the top of that function.

diff --git a/vectors/vectors-impl.scm b/vectors/vectors-impl.scm

index 9b798e0..0be2c0c 100644

--- a/vectors/vectors-impl.scm

+++ b/vectors/vectors-impl.scm

@@ -736,7 +736,6 @@

                    (and (binary-vector= elt=? vec1 (car vec2+))

                         (loop vec2+)))))))))

 (define (binary-vector= elt=? vector-a vector-b)

-  (or (eq? vector-a vector-b)           ;+++

   (let ((length-a (vector-length vector-a))

         (length-b (vector-length vector-b)))

     (letrec ((loop (lambda (i)

@@ -746,11 +745,10 @@

                                     (vector-ref vector-b i)

                                     i)))))

              (test (lambda (elt-a elt-b i)

-                         (and (or (eq? elt-a elt-b) ;+++

-                                  (elt=? elt-a elt-b))

+                     (and (elt=? elt-a elt-b)

                           (loop (+ i 1))))))

       (and (= length-a length-b)

-               (loop 0))))))

+           (loop 0)))))

On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 7:09 PM John Cowan <xxxxxx@ccil.org> wrote:

LGTM.  Here's the patch for srfi-113-impl.scm

diff --git a/vectors/vectors-impl.scm b/vectors/vectors-impl.scm

index 9b798e0..d18ac86 100644

--- a/vectors/vectors-impl.scm

+++ b/vectors/vectors-impl.scm

@@ -745,10 +745,8 @@

                                   (test (vector-ref vector-a i)

                                         (vector-ref vector-b i)

                                         i)))))

-                 (test (lambda (elt-a elt-b i)

-                         (and (or (eq? elt-a elt-b) ;+++

-                                  (elt=? elt-a elt-b))

-                              (loop (+ i 1))))))

+                 (test (lambda (elt-a elt-b i) (elt=? elt-a elt-b))

+                     (loop (+ i 1))))

           (and (= length-a length-b)

                (loop 0))))))

On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 6:42 PM, Arthur A. Gleckler <xxxxxx@speechcode.com> wrote:

​Thanks for catching this, Jim.

I've​ attached a patch to add an erratum to the document.  John, please review that.  Note that I removed the next sentence as well, since it depends on the one you suggested removing.

I'll leave it to you to update the implementation.