Mail Index

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 99 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 99 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

• Thread Index

• I would tone down some of the language
  • From: Ray Blaak
• use "rec" instead of "rtd"?
  • From: Ray Blaak
• Re: use "rec" instead of "rtd"?
  • From: Ray Blaak
• Re: I would tone down some of the language
  • From: William D Clinger
• Re: use "rec" instead of "rtd"?
  • From: David Van Horn
• Re: use "rec" instead of "rtd"?
  • From: David Van Horn
• Initial comments
  • From: Alan Watson
• Why vectors?
  • From: Derick Eddington
• Clarify mutability of all define-record-type <field spec>
  • From: Derick Eddington
• Description of rtd-mutator does not specify what it does for immutable fields
  • From: Derick Eddington
• Why the inversion of mutability between make-rtd and define-record-type?
  • From: Derick Eddington
• Consider a different define-record-type syntax
  • From: Derick Eddington
• Re: Why vectors?
  • From: Per Bothner
• Re: Why vectors?
  • From: Elf
• Re: Why vectors?
  • From: Per Bothner
• Re: Why vectors?
  • From: Physics
• Re: Why vectors?
  • From: Derick Eddington
• Re: Why vectors?
  • From: Derick Eddington
• Re: Why vectors?
  • From: Derick Eddington
• Re: Why vectors?
  • From: Elf
• Re: Why vectors?
  • From: Elf
• Re: Why vectors?
  • From: Elf
• Re: Initial comments
  • From: William D Clinger
• Re: Clarify mutability of all define-record-type <field spec>
  • From: William D Clinger
• Re: Description of rtd-mutator does not specify what it does for immutable fields
  • From: William D Clinger
• Re: Why the inversion of mutability between make-rtd and define-record-type?
  • From: William D Clinger
• Re: Consider a different define-record-type syntax
  • From: William D Clinger
• Re: Why vectors?
  • From: Derick Eddington
• Re: Why vectors?
  • From: Derick Eddington
• Re: Why vectors?
  • From: Derick Eddington
• Re: Consider a different define-record-type syntax
  • From: Derick Eddington
• Re: Initial comments
  • From: Alan Watson
• Re: Initial comments
  • From: William D Clinger
• Re: Why vectors?
  • From: Per Bothner
• Reference implementation's use of datum->syntax is not portable
  • From: Derick Eddington
• Re: Initial comments
  • From: Alan Watson
• Re: Initial comments
  • From: William D Clinger
• Re: Reference implementation's use of datum->syntax is not portable
  • From: William D Clinger
• Re: Reference implementation's use of datum->syntax is not portable
  • From: Physics
• rtd-constructor and immutable fields
  • From: Arthur Smyles
• Re: Why vectors?
  • From: Elf
• Re: Why vectors?
  • From: Elf
• Two suggestions about record identity
  • From: Alexey Radul
• Re: Two suggestions about record identity
  • From: Ray Blaak
• Re: Why vectors?
  • From: Per Bothner
• ANN: Implementation of draft for Gambit
  • From: Arthur Smyles
• why generative?
  • From: Shiro Kawai
• Revised SRFI 99 ERR5RS Records
  • From: David Van Horn
• Re: Reference implementation's use of datum->syntax is not portable
  • From: William D Clinger
• Re: why generative?
  • From: William D Clinger
• Re: why generative?
  • From: Per Bothner
• Re: why generative?
  • From: Shiro Kawai
• Re: why generative?
  • From: William D Clinger
• Re: why generative?
  • From: will
• Re: why generative?
  • From: Per Bothner
• Re: why generative?
  • From: Shiro Kawai
• Re: why generative?
  • From: William D Clinger
• Re: why generative?
  • From: Andre van Tonder
• Re: why generative?
  • From: Shiro Kawai
• Re: why generative?
  • From: William D Clinger
• Re: why generative?
  • From: will
• Re: why generative?
  • From: Per Bothner
• Re: why generative?
  • From: Thomas Bushnell BSG
• Re: why generative?
  • From: Shiro Kawai
• Re: why generative?
  • From: Shiro Kawai
• Re: why generative?
  • From: Shiro Kawai
• Re: why generative?
  • From: Thomas Bushnell BSG
• Re: why generative?
  • From: Shiro Kawai
• Re: why generative?
  • From: William D Clinger
• Re: why generative?
  • From: Shiro Kawai
• Re: why generative?
  • From: will
• Re: why generative?
  • From: Shiro Kawai
• Procedural vs. inspection, lists vs. vectors (2 of 3)
  • From: John Cowan
• Convenience forms and hygiene (1 of 3)
  • From: John Cowan
• Record printing (3 of 3)
  • From: John Cowan
• Re: why generative?
  • From: William D Clinger
• Re: Convenience forms and hygiene (1 of 3)
  • From: William D Clinger
• Re: Procedural vs. inspection, lists vs. vectors (2 of 3)
  • From: William D Clinger
• Re: Record printing (3 of 3)
  • From: William D Clinger
• Re: why generative?
  • From: Shiro Kawai
• Re: Procedural vs. inspection, lists vs. vectors (2 of 3)
  • From: David Van Horn