[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: propositions, oppositions, and some minor details

On Mon, 13 Sep 2004, Felix Winkelmann wrote:

I think `record->sexp' is actually pretty handy (for example for debugging purposes).
I vehemently suggest to leave it in.


That leads me to another issue: What about separate compilation?
The problem is here that I might have two source-files, using the
same record type, compiled separately in two different instances of
the compiler. How can I make sure that

; a.scm

(define-record foo ...)

; b.scm

(define-record foo ...)

Refer to the same type?

Good question. Hard to answer, though, without a specification of what spearate compilation is... :)