Hi Chongkai - <br><br>That makes sense - Thanks for the info ;) <br><br>yinso <br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 5/29/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Chongkai Zhu</b> <<a href="mailto:email@example.com">firstname.lastname@example.org
</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Check the implementation of SRFI 9 in PLT Scheme, and you will find out
<br>it is just syntax sugar on top of structs. Obviously structs have<br>features that the SRFI 9 API doesn't export, so structs are more<br>powerful. On the other side, if you want portable Scheme code, quite<br>many Scheme implementations supports SRFI 9, but structs is specific to PLT.
<br><br>Chongkai<br><br>YC wrote:<br>> Hi all -<br>><br>> just wondering whether people have experiences with SRFI 9 on whether<br>> it's useful. Are there reasons to use records instead of structs? It<br>
> seems that the two concepts are at best equivalent.<br>><br>> Thanks,<br>> yinso<br>><br><br></blockquote></div><br>