s c h e m a t i c s : c o o k b o o k

This Web

Other Webs

Schematics

RSS

Scheme Links

Comments

I object to this egregiously gratuitous PLT-specificness, when it is explicitly stated in the CookbookFAQ page that pages should not be so gratuitously PLT-specific in contexts such as these. Here is the equivalent SRFI 9 page:

Record types represent abstract, opaque data types. A record is an instance of a particular record type. The DEFINE-RECORD-TYPE syntax defines a new record type. An example is likely the easiest way to understand the DEFINE-RECORD-TYPE macro:

(define-record-type pare
  (kons a d)
  pare?
  (a kar)
  (d kdr set-kdr!))

This defines a record type PARE with two fields, A & D. KONS is defined to be a procedure of two arguments, the two fields. PARE? is defined to be a procedure of one argument, a disjoint type predicate for PARE records. KAR extracts the A field from PARE records; KDR extracts the D field. SET-KDR! is defined to be a procedure of two arguments that assigns the D field of its first argument to its second argument. (There is no way to assign the A field of PARE records.) Here is a sample interaction:

> (define p (kons 5 3))
> (pare? p)
#t
> (pare? (cons 5 3))
#f
> (kar p)
5
> (kdr p)
3
> (set-kdr! p 'frobozz)
> (kdr p)
frobozz

-- TaylorCampbell - 30 Aug 2004

-- NoelWelsh - 01 Jul 2004