Re: srfe records in reworked match

[stefan]

On Wednesday 21 April 2010 10:40:29 am Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> As noted in Shinn’s match-cond-expand.scm, this record matching form is
> not ideal:
> 
>   ;; Annoying unhygienic record matching.  Record patterns look like
>   ;;   ($ record fields...)
>   ;; where the record name simply assumes that the same name suffixed
>   ;; with a "?" is the correct predicate.
> 

Entering,

scheme@(guile-user)> (macroexpand '(n? x))
(if (struct? x) (eq? (struct-vtable x) n) #f)

So, I just tok the expanded line directly instead of n?. 

/Stefan