Issue EQUAL-STRUCTURE

[Kim A. Barrett <IIM%ECLA@ECLC.USC.EDU>]

> Date: Fri, 24 Feb 89 01:46:12 PST
> From: Jon L White <jonl@lucid.com>
>
> Kim, don't you have something turned around here?  Previous mail referred to
> CLtL p81 to show that defstruct instances should be descended componentwise
> by EQUALP.  This is not a statement about classes in general -- just about
> structure-class, and its historic meaning under EQUALP.  Thus the Hawaii
> amendment was an *incompatible* change (which has already raised some
> question in Lucid's customer land!). This incompatible change unfortunately
> does nothing at all towards supplying the "mechanisms" you call for, and in
> fact breaks some existing code (in a very inscrutable way).

I stand by what I said.  I believe you yourself have taken a position on some
issues that the status quo is wrong and needs to be fixed.

> Given the failure to make EQUALP generic, wouldn't it be far better to leave
> it alone and not make backwards-incompatible changes which do no one any
> good? 

See new Issue EQUALP-GENERIC, coming soon to a mailbox near you.

kab
-------