Re: generic method names for collections

[Per Bothner <bothner@cygnus.com>]

> This works fine in standard Scheme,
> but for the ref implementation above, (ref ..) would have to return a
> pointer
> to a pointer to a structure in order to modify it. Which wouldn't work in
> this implementation.

> Or am I missing something?

Yes.  The idea is that:
	(set! (foo ...) value)
is re-written to:
	((setter foo) value ...)

This was discussed in the Guile mailing list recently.

	--Per Bothner
Cygnus Solutions     bothner@cygnus.com     http://www.cygnus.com/~bothner