[Larceny-users] Regarding +inf.0

[Felix Klock]

David (cc'ing larceny-use4rs)-

On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 3:17 PM, David Rush <kumoyuki at gmail.com> wrote:
> I suspect that this is a behavior specified by R6RS, but why isn't
> +inf.0 EQ? to itself? It is currently EQV? and EQUAL?, so I'm a little
> confused.

The *value* produced from evaluating the expression +inf.0 actually is
eq to "itself," as one would expect (for any object), as illustrated
below.

> (eq? +inf.0 +inf.0)
#f

> (let ((x +inf.0)) (eq? x x))
#t

> (inexact? +inf.0)
#t

Beyond that, I do not understand your question; why would any two
boxed objects necessarily be eq?  (All inexacts in the current version
of Larceny are boxed.)

-Felix