Prior art table, and the use of ":" for lexical syntax Jeronimo Pellegrini (27 Jan 2025 23:02 UTC)
Re: Prior art table, and the use of ":" for lexical syntax Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe (28 Jan 2025 18:55 UTC)
Re: Prior art table, and the use of ":" for lexical syntax Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe (28 Jan 2025 21:15 UTC)
Re: Prior art table, and the use of ":" for lexical syntax Jeronimo Pellegrini (28 Jan 2025 21:41 UTC)

Re: Prior art table, and the use of ":" for lexical syntax Jeronimo Pellegrini 28 Jan 2025 21:22 UTC

On 2025-01-28 18:15, Wolfgang Corcoran-Mathe wrote:
> Jeronimo:

Hello Wolfgang!

> After further investigation, I think that uninterned symbols, 'eqv?',
> and
> 'symbol=?' display some very strange behavior in STklos. For example,
> in
> STklos 2.10,
>
>     > (define x (string->uninterned-symbol "foo"))
>     ;; x
>     > (eqv? x 'foo)
>     #t
>     > (symbol=? x 'foo)
>     #f
>
> Is this a bug?  Surely 'eqv?' and 'symbol=?' should agree here. (The
> same thing occurs with 'gensym': symbols created by 'gensym' are eqv?
> to other symbols with the same name, but they aren't symbol=? to them.)

Yes, because gensym uses string->uninterned-symbol.

And yes, it's a bug! Can you file an issue at
https://github.com/egallesio/STklos ?

Thanks for spotting this!

J.