Re: srfi-9 record type checking

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi,

Kevin Ryde <address@hidden> writes:

> In absense of violent objections I made the change below.  I didn't do
> the same in the 1.6 branch, there I only amended the srfi-9
> implementation.

Cool, thanks.  Maybe this should be described in the `NEWS' file?

> Is the local-eval stuff supposed to minimize the amount of environment
> or whatever captured by the returned functions?  Guessing that's so I
> put the type check in a helper function.

Perhaps, but `the-root-environment' is pretty much the same as the
environment in which `record-accessor' is defined, right?

Thanks,
Ludovic.