Hi, Philip McGrath <phi...@philipmcgrath.com> skribis:
> On 3/30/22 09:28, Andy Wingo wrote: >> Too bad about all that other crap about checking whether the index >> is in >> range and the field is boxed or not, though :-/ Probably there is a >> better design... >> Andy > > For the index-out-of-range part, when I saw `record-accessor`, I > thought of it as similar to Racket's `make-struct-field-accessor`[1], > which can check the index just once, when the accessor is created, > rather than each time the accessor is used. That's (part of) what > Racket's `struct` form expands to. > > Would it be reasonable to use `record-accessor` in the implementation > of SRFI 9? Yes, or in (guix records). Medium-term, I thought we could rebase (guix records) on Guile records with an eye on adding support for inheritance. So perhaps we could do both. Ludo’.
