> On Nov 2, 2022, at 6:36 AM, Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen <xxxxxx@nieper-wisskirchen.de> wrote:
>
> In any case, when we want to support the reading and writing of
> records, some solutions (and probably the simplest ) require that a
> record-type registry must be maintained anyway:
>
>> (define-record-type foo (nongenerative ...) ...)
>> (gc)
>> (read)
> <external representation of record type foo>

Please don’t force implementations to use a (centralized) registry.  Decentralization is necessary for code mobility.

To solve write/read invariance of records the external representation has to contain as much relevant information as the record type declaration.  Gambit does this.  In a distributed setting node A can send a record to node B, and then node B sends it back to A, and the same type is gotten on A.  Moreover, B does not even have to be running code that contains that record type definition.

Marc