Re: pcase: Semantics of atom QPATS

[Michael Heerdegen]

Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:

> [ It's an `equal` test we want, not `eq`.  ]

Of course - that was a typo.

> The issue is rather that not all types might want an `equal` test.
> E.g. we could accept patterns like
>
>     `#s(hash-table (data ,key1 ,val1))
>
> Which is why I prefer signaling an error: it lets us extend the
> semantics of ` without any fear of breaking backward compatibility.

Ah, makes sense.


Thanks,

Michael.