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

Re: Pains from duplicate field names [Miscellaneous loose ends]

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 76 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 76 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

On Fri, 7 Oct 2005, Michael Sperber wrote:

- Instead, the current design makes positional indexing an irreducible
  part of what it means to be a record [...]

That bothers me, too (personally, that is), and it suggests (to me,
personally) that there should actually be a layer underneath the
records which deals with subtyping and positional indexing only, and
leaves everything dealing with named fields for the procedural layer.

I would like that better, also. It seems to me that it would be cleaner and simpler.