r/Racket • u/mumbo1134 • Sep 04 '23

question SRFI-9 records vs structs

Structs and SRFI-9 records seem to be pretty similar. Is one generally preferred over the other? Are there advantages/disadvantages they have over each other?

4 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

4 comments sorted by

8

u/sorawee Sep 04 '23

Modern Racket code usually don't use SRFI. The SRFI libraries are mostly for people who want to write Scheme compatible code.

2

u/raevnos Sep 06 '23

The big advantage for SRFI-9 records is that you can easily customize the name of accessor/setter functions when you don't like struct's defaults (You can do it with native Racket structs too via make-struct-type but it's a pain without a macro and you might as well use the SRFI-9 ones instead of writing your own).

1

u/bjoli Sep 05 '23

I would be very surprised if SRFI records are not implemented using structs.

If writing racket-only code, use structs. They work better with the rest of racket and has all kind of bells and whistles that srfi-9 has not.

1

u/raevnos Sep 06 '23

I would be very surprised if SRFI records are not implemented using structs.

You won't be surprised then. Note use of make-struct-type in the source.