Re: better error messages through assertions

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi,

Philip McGrath <philip@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’.