Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!image.soe.clarkson.edu!jk0
From: jk0@image.soe.clarkson.edu (Jason Coughlin)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme
Subject: Re: () as an expression
Message-ID: <1990Jan16.231311.18316@sun.soe.clarkson.edu>
Date: 16 Jan 90 23:13:11 GMT
References: <5413@tekcrl.LABS.TEK.COM>
Sender: jk0@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Jason Coughlin)
Organization: Clarkson University, Potsdam, NY
Lines: 18

From article <5413@tekcrl.LABS.TEK.COM>, by kend@tekchips.LABS.TEK.COM (Ken Dickey):
> Note also that #f and '() may be distinct in newer Scheme
> implementations [the value of (eq? '() #f) is currently unspecified]. 

This leads to another point: I think we need a definitive answer on
whether #f == ().  In my Scheme, #f and () are two different entities. 
I like this because in my mind, #f != ().  #f is boolean, () is an empty
list.

So what say you about:
(BOOLEAN? '())
(NULL? '())
(EQ? '() #f)
-- 
Jason Coughlin ( jk0@sun.soe.clarkson.edu , jk0@clutx )
"Every jumbled pile of person has a thinking part that wonders what the
part that isn't thinking isn't thinking of." - They Might Be Giants