[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Programmer-defined data types, version 2

I endorse version 2 and all your replies to everyone, with one very
minor nit: allowing RECORD-TYPE-FIELD-NAMES to return a permutation of
the original argument to MAKE-RECORD-TYPE feels inconsistent with
making optional the list-of-field-names argument to
MAKE-RECORD-CONSTRUCTOR.  The original ordering of the list must be
remembered, in case someone omits the argument to
MAKE-RECORD-CONSTRUCTOR, so why should a Scheme system gratuitously
refuse to cough it up?  The order might be of some interest to, say, a
portable inspector.  But I don't feel at all strongly about this.