(Previous discussion continued)
Re: Exposing monomorphic predicates/accessors Jorgen Schaefer 15 Nov 2004 21:51 UTC

Re: Exposing monomorphic predicates/accessors Jorgen Schaefer 15 Nov 2004 21:51 UTC

Andre van Tonder <xxxxxx@now.het.brown.edu> writes:

> To overcome these objections, I propose the following:
>
>      - Essentially keep the SRFI-9 semantics for define-record-type
>        (with a small modification below).  All types introduced
>        this way are disjoint and there is *no* subtyping.
>      - Farm off the polymorphism to a new form, define-record-class
>        (or perhaps define-record-interface, according to taste).

Are you aware of Scheme48's generic dispatch system? I'm not sure
whether it's exactly what you want, but it gets close:

 -- Macro: define-simple-type typename (supertype ...) predicate

Here, you probably want to use SRFI-9 type names instead of the
predicate.

Then, Scheme48 allows to define methods based on a generic
procedure:

 -- Macro: define-generic proc-name method-table-name
 -- Macro: define-method method-table prototype body

Again, probably not _exactly_ what you want, but close.

I thought I'd make you aware of these. The source for these are in
scheme48/scheme/rts/method.scm

Greetings,
        -- Jorgen

--
((email . "xxxxxx@forcix.cx") (www . "http://www.forcix.cx/")
 (gpg   . "1024D/028AF63C")   (irc . "nick forcer on IRCnet"))