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

Re: [Scheme-reports] Are record field names bound by a record type def?

Andre van Tonder scripsit:

> But how about the field names?  Are they bound to anything by the
> record type definition.  If not, why do we have them?  What is their
> function?

A SRFI 9 constructor is a procedure whose arguments correspond to some
of the fields of the record in an order which may or may not be the
specification order.  The formal parameters of the constructor are field
names; they are not normally bound to anything.

With techies, I've generally found              John Cowan
If your arguments lose the first round          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
    Make it rhyme, make it scan                 cowan@x
    Then you generally can
Make the same stupid point seem profound!           --Jonathan Robie

Scheme-reports mailing list