  Backward compatibility, pattern matching and some small things
and thanks for this SRFI - I like the ideas very much. Anyways,
I'm going to nag about the parts I don't understand.  My main
problem is the relationship between SRFI-57 and SRFI-9. As far
as features are concerned, this SRFI looks like a perfect
extension to SRFI-9, yet it doesn't try to stay compatible with
SRFI-9. Is there a good reason for changing the argument order
and makeup of the DEFINE-RECORD macro from that specified in
SRFI-9? I.e. that the predicate comes last, and that the fields
are specified as a list of field specifiers instead of
specifiers as separate arguments?  If there's a good reason,
please add that rationale to the SRFI document. If not, I'd
greatly appreciate switching to the SRFI-9  The subtyping part
of the SRFI is wonderful, but I'm missing a specification on
what happens if someone subtypes two records with the same field
name, but different accessors, or two records with the same
accessors, but different field nam