Re: Making 'eq' == 'eql' in bignum branch

[Paul Eggert]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> I don't think we want to argue for a total elimination of
> most-positive-fixnum from our code.

I agree. Software like 'calc' springs to mind: quite possibly it will want to do 
some arithmetic in fixnums, and will want to know the fixnum range to do that, 
and most-negative-fixnum and most-positive-fixnum are how it can do that.

As I recall, Gerd introduced most-positive-fixnum and most-negative-fixnum to 
Emacs Lisp in 2001, as it was a good idea taken from Common Lisp. However, 
fixnump and bignump are not in Common Lisp, and we don't need them in Emacs Lisp 
either. When we're reinventing the wheel why add unnecessary gizmos?