>
> I believe that the last sentence is not entirely correct. It is
> effectively UNSPECIFIED, whether or not the empty list is the false
> object or not. I recall Dr. Wilson pointing this out already some
> time ago. Please see the excerpts from R4RS enclosed for easy
> reference below.
[ SNIP ]
> EXCERPT FROM R4RS
>
> [from r4rs/procs.tex:]
>
> \section{Booleans}
> \label{booleansection}
>
[ SNIP ]
> \vest Of all the standard Scheme values, only \schfalse{}
> % is guaranteed to count
> counts as false in conditional expressions.
> % It is not
> % specified whether the empty list\index{empty list} counts as false
> % or as true in conditional expressions.
> Except for \schfalse{},
> % and possibly the empty list,
> all standard Scheme values, including \schtrue,
> pairs, the empty list, symbols, numbers, strings, vectors, and procedures,
> count as true.
>
[ MORE ]
AFAIK in TeX source everything from '%' to 'End-of-Line' is a comment, so
my reading of R4RS is :
... the empty list, ... count as true.
This also agrees with the abstract syntax (see IF and the truish utility)
so
> There may exist perfectly legal R4RS code running under a specific
> R4RS-compliant Scheme that assumes
>
> (eq? #f '()) ==> #t.
is probably not correct
(i agree that the section about differences from R3RS suggests that this
point should be unspecified. I see it at erroneous)