On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 4:15 AM Daphne Preston-Kendal <d...@nonceword.org> wrote:
> So you want to do something like this?: > > (define-record-type Person > (make-person name age height) person? > (age person-age) > (height person-height) > (name person-name) > ) > > To be honest, I wasn’t aware that this sort of thing was allowed by R7RS > small anyway. I do see the utility, though > Yes, exactly. It's more useful the more slots a record type has. > With the benefit of hindsight, Olin was obviously right. SRFI 9 is one of > the more brittle syntactic designs in the history of Scheme, and people > obviously do want to extend it compatibly. (Not least because it got the > blessing of R7RS small, but SRFI 99 predates that.) But it’s easy to say > such things with hindsight. > Oops.
