On Wednesday 21 April 2010 10:40:29 am Ludovic Courtès wrote: > As noted in Shinn’s match-cond-expand.scm, this record matching form is > not ideal: > > ;; Annoying unhygienic record matching. Record patterns look like > ;; ($ record fields...) > ;; where the record name simply assumes that the same name suffixed > ;; with a "?" is the correct predicate. >
Entering, scheme@(guile-user)> (macroexpand '(n? x)) (if (struct? x) (eq? (struct-vtable x) n) #f) So, I just tok the expanded line directly instead of n?. /Stefan
