Sam Tobin-Hochstadt

I ended up looking manually, and counting the calls to `resolv` etc. I have been unable to find anything that mentions `xlstat` at all, so my documentation search was pretty...

Furthermore, both Chez and Racket make `(eqv? nan.0 nan.0)` true, which is probably what you want (although maybe not?).

Just FYI, the linked Racket bug has a number of other relevant commits linked from it.

Note that large uses of `match` (at least in Racket) can generate quite deeply nested `if` expressions. I'm not sure if that's likely to be a problem with the issue...

This did come from typed racket, where the `sequence/c` contract is slower than `set/c`. But you should be able to put `in-set` in a for loop over the neighbors and...

Somehow I'm unable to run it properly, but what if you take out the `in-set` in `in-weighted-graph-neighbors`, and put it in the `for` loop?

Right, but the call to `in-set` ought to be much faster when it can be specialized by the `for` loop (unless `in-set` doesn't do that?).

Right, it is, but not much. Consider these three loops: ``` (define l (build-list 1000 add1)) (define lseq (in-list l)) (for/sum ([i l]) i) (for/sum ([i lseq]) i) (for/sum ([i...

Yes, but either that could work better, or we could have `in-hash-set`.

@lexi-lambda I've worked some (but not finished) on an `r6rs-immutable` library, which would be like `r6rs` but without mutable pairs, to make it easier to reuse useful R6RS code.