Re: records as s-expressions

[Marius Vollmer]

address@hidden (Paul Jarc) writes:

> Marius Vollmer <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Something like this:
>>
>>   (define r (make-record-type foo '(a b) readable-record-printer))
>>   (register-record-reader 'foo foo)
>
> Is there any reaon that make-record-type should not automatically
> register the type name for reading as well as printing?

Hmm, the only reason I can think of is that record type names are not
necessarily unique right now.  But they wont magically become unique
when we print them readably...  So yes, I think we can make records
print readably by default.

-- 
GPG: D5D4E405 - 2F9B BCCC 8527 692A 04E3  331E FAF8 226A D5D4 E405