Re: Backward compatibility, pattern matching and some small things Andre van Tonder 13 Sep 2004 19:03 UTC

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004, Alex Shinn wrote:

> At Sun, 12 Sep 2004 16:49:25 -0400 (EDT), Andre van Tonder wrote:
> We could allow #f in place of the constructor or predicate when you
> don't want to specify it (I'm pretty sure I've seen a Scheme that does
> this).

Thanks Alex.  i took this idea up in my response to Taylor Campbell.

> Please do!  Your implementation is beautiful, but matching is an
> entirely orthogonal concept to records and I don't think you should
> let the implementation influence the design.