[MLton] ML/Lisp/Scheme, =, eq?, eqv?, equal?

[Bradley Lucier]

On Feb 23, 2004, at 4:41 PM, Henry Cejtin wrote:

> The  problem  with  making  ML  reals an equality type is that 
> floating point
> equality doesn't quite work as one would  expect  of  an  equality  
> relation.
> Note,  for  example,  that  it  is not reflexive (Nan is not `equal' 
> to Nan).

Well, there are four types of "equal" in Scheme.  To paraphrase 
Clinton, it depends on what "equal" equals, hence my question about 
"equality" in ML. With my changes to R4RS, = would not be reflexive but 
eq?/eqv?/equal would be.

> Also a simple test for equality is almost certainly  wrong  (because  
> of  the
> nature of floating point operations).

As a numerical analyst and sometimes library writer/tester I tend to 
disagree with this statement.

Brad