[Chicken-janitors] [Chicken-bugs] #420: numbers egg should redefine hash

[Chicken Scheme]

#420: numbers egg should redefine hash
---------------------------------------------------+------------------------
 Reporter:  Owen Barnett <address@hidden>  |        Type:  defect      
   Status:  new                                    |    Priority:  minor       
Milestone:                                         |   Component:  extensions  
  Version:  3.0.0                                  |    Keywords:  numbers hash
---------------------------------------------------+------------------------
 I've been doing some work with bignums and ran across a problem.
 After loading the numbers extension, shouldn't I be able to use
 bignums in hash tables?  This doesn't seem to be supported currently.
 I think the issue is that numbers doesn't redefine 'hash', since I get
 different return values for hash on the same bignum:

  #;1> (use numbers)
  #;2> (hash 100000000000)
  190984245
  #;3> (hash 100000000000)
  190987373
  #;4> (eqv? 100000000000 100000000000)
  #t

 Thanks,
 Owen

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://trac.callcc.org/ticket/420>
Chicken Scheme <http://www.call-with-current-continuation.org/>
The CHICKEN Scheme-to-C compiler