Hi Andreas,
Andreas Rottmann <a.rottm...@gmx.at> writes:
> The expansion of `define-inlinable' contained an expression, which made
> SRFI-9's `define-record-type' fail in non-toplevel contexts ("definition
> used in expression context").
SRFI-9 says “Record-type definitions may only occur at top-level”, and
I’m inclined to stick to it. If we diverge, then people could write
code thinking it’s portable SRFI-9 code while it’s not.
How about adding a ‘let-record-type’ or similar in (srfi srfi-9 gnu)?
Thanks,
Ludo’.
