Incompatibility with pattern matching

[Andre van Tonder <andre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

It seems that the constructor paradigm chosen in the draft does not easily 
accommodate future extensions for pattern matching.  The problem is that a 
constructor can be many to one.  E.g., in

  (define-type foo (x y)
    (fields a immutable (+ x y)))

we cannot automatically generate a pattern that can be used (like in MzScheme):

  (match (make-foo 1 2)
   ((make-foo x y) .....))

Indeed, since the record types of this SRFI are not freely generated, 
automatic destructuring is not a sensible operation.

Andre