diff --git a/chibi/match.sld b/chibi/match.sld
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..36a652b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/chibi/match.sld
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+
+(define-library (chibi match)
+  (export match match-lambda match-lambda* match-let match-letrec match-let*)
+  (cond-expand
+   (chibi (import (chibi)))
+   (else (import (scheme base))))
+  (include "match/match.scm"))
diff --git a/chibi/match/match.scm b/chibi/match/match.scm
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4a5d038
--- /dev/null
+++ b/chibi/match/match.scm
@@ -0,0 +1,972 @@
+;;;; match.scm -- portable hygienic pattern matcher -*- coding: utf-8 -*-
+;;
+;; This code is written by Alex Shinn and placed in the
+;; Public Domain.  All warranties are disclaimed.
+
+;;> \example-import[(srfi 9)]
+
+;;> A portable hygienic pattern matcher.
+
+;;> This is a full superset of the popular \hyperlink[
+;;> "http://www.cs.indiana.edu/scheme-repository/code.match.html"]{match}
+;;> package by Andrew Wright, written in fully portable \scheme{syntax-rules}
+;;> and thus preserving hygiene.
+
+;;> The most notable extensions are the ability to use \emph{non-linear}
+;;> patterns - patterns in which the same identifier occurs multiple
+;;> times, tail patterns after ellipsis, and the experimental tree patterns.
+
+;;> \section{Patterns}
+
+;;> Patterns are written to look like the printed representation of
+;;> the objects they match.  The basic usage is
+
+;;> \scheme{(match expr (pat body ...) ...)}
+
+;;> where the result of \var{expr} is matched against each pattern in
+;;> turn, and the corresponding body is evaluated for the first to
+;;> succeed.  Thus, a list of three elements matches a list of three
+;;> elements.
+
+;;> \example{(let ((ls (list 1 2 3))) (match ls ((1 2 3) #t)))}
+
+;;> If no patterns match an error is signalled.
+
+;;> Identifiers will match anything, and make the corresponding
+;;> binding available in the body.
+
+;;> \example{(match (list 1 2 3) ((a b c) b))}
+
+;;> If the same identifier occurs multiple times, the first instance
+;;> will match anything, but subsequent instances must match a value
+;;> which is \scheme{equal?} to the first.
+
+;;> \example{(match (list 1 2 1) ((a a b) 1) ((a b a) 2))}
+
+;;> The special identifier \scheme{_} matches anything, no matter how
+;;> many times it is used, and does not bind the result in the body.
+
+;;> \example{(match (list 1 2 1) ((_ _ b) 1) ((a b a) 2))}
+
+;;> To match a literal identifier (or list or any other literal), use
+;;> \scheme{quote}.
+
+;;> \example{(match 'a ('b 1) ('a 2))}
+
+;;> Analogous to its normal usage in scheme, \scheme{quasiquote} can
+;;> be used to quote a mostly literally matching object with selected
+;;> parts unquoted.
+
+;;> \example|{(match (list 1 2 3) (`(1 ,b ,c) (list b c)))}|
+
+;;> Often you want to match any number of a repeated pattern.  Inside
+;;> a list pattern you can append \scheme{...} after an element to
+;;> match zero or more of that pattern (like a regexp Kleene star).
+
+;;> \example{(match (list 1 2) ((1 2 3 ...) #t))}
+;;> \example{(match (list 1 2 3) ((1 2 3 ...) #t))}
+;;> \example{(match (list 1 2 3 3 3) ((1 2 3 ...) #t))}
+
+;;> Pattern variables matched inside the repeated pattern are bound to
+;;> a list of each matching instance in the body.
+
+;;> \example{(match (list 1 2) ((a b c ...) c))}
+;;> \example{(match (list 1 2 3) ((a b c ...) c))}
+;;> \example{(match (list 1 2 3 4 5) ((a b c ...) c))}
+
+;;> More than one \scheme{...} may not be used in the same list, since
+;;> this would require exponential backtracking in the general case.
+;;> However, \scheme{...} need not be the final element in the list,
+;;> and may be succeeded by a fixed number of patterns.
+
+;;> \example{(match (list 1 2 3 4) ((a b c ... d e) c))}
+;;> \example{(match (list 1 2 3 4 5) ((a b c ... d e) c))}
+;;> \example{(match (list 1 2 3 4 5 6 7) ((a b c ... d e) c))}
+
+;;> \scheme{___} is provided as an alias for \scheme{...} when it is
+;;> inconvenient to use the ellipsis (as in a syntax-rules template).
+
+;;> The \scheme{..1} syntax is exactly like the \scheme{...} except
+;;> that it matches one or more repetitions (like a regexp "+").
+
+;;> \example{(match (list 1 2) ((a b c ..1) c))}
+;;> \example{(match (list 1 2 3) ((a b c ..1) c))}
+
+;;> The boolean operators \scheme{and}, \scheme{or} and \scheme{not}
+;;> can be used to group and negate patterns analogously to their
+;;> Scheme counterparts.
+
+;;> The \scheme{and} operator ensures that all subpatterns match.
+;;> This operator is often used with the idiom \scheme{(and x pat)} to
+;;> bind \var{x} to the entire value that matches \var{pat}
+;;> (c.f. "as-patterns" in ML or Haskell).  Another common use is in
+;;> conjunction with \scheme{not} patterns to match a general case
+;;> with certain exceptions.
+
+;;> \example{(match 1 ((and) #t))}
+;;> \example{(match 1 ((and x) x))}
+;;> \example{(match 1 ((and x 1) x))}
+
+;;> The \scheme{or} operator ensures that at least one subpattern
+;;> matches.  If the same identifier occurs in different subpatterns,
+;;> it is matched independently.  All identifiers from all subpatterns
+;;> are bound if the \scheme{or} operator matches, but the binding is
+;;> only defined for identifiers from the subpattern which matched.
+
+;;> \example{(match 1 ((or) #t) (else #f))}
+;;> \example{(match 1 ((or x) x))}
+;;> \example{(match 1 ((or x 2) x))}
+
+;;> The \scheme{not} operator succeeds if the given pattern doesn't
+;;> match.  None of the identifiers used are available in the body.
+
+;;> \example{(match 1 ((not 2) #t))}
+
+;;> The more general operator \scheme{?} can be used to provide a
+;;> predicate.  The usage is \scheme{(? predicate pat ...)} where
+;;> \var{predicate} is a Scheme expression evaluating to a predicate
+;;> called on the value to match, and any optional patterns after the
+;;> predicate are then matched as in an \scheme{and} pattern.
+
+;;> \example{(match 1 ((? odd? x) x))}
+
+;;> The field operator \scheme{=} is used to extract an arbitrary
+;;> field and match against it.  It is useful for more complex or
+;;> conditional destructuring that can't be more directly expressed in
+;;> the pattern syntax.  The usage is \scheme{(= field pat)}, where
+;;> \var{field} can be any expression, and should result in a
+;;> procedure of one argument, which is applied to the value to match
+;;> to generate a new value to match against \var{pat}.
+
+;;> Thus the pattern \scheme{(and (= car x) (= cdr y))} is equivalent
+;;> to \scheme{(x . y)}, except it will result in an immediate error
+;;> if the value isn't a pair.
+
+;;> \example{(match '(1 . 2) ((= car x) x))}
+;;> \example{(match 4 ((= square x) x))}
+
+;;> The record operator \scheme{$} is used as a concise way to match
+;;> records defined by SRFI-9 (or SRFI-99).  The usage is
+;;> \scheme{($ rtd field ...)}, where \var{rtd} should be the record
+;;> type descriptor specified as the first argument to
+;;> \scheme{define-record-type}, and each \var{field} is a subpattern
+;;> matched against the fields of the record in order.  Not all fields
+;;> must be present.
+
+;;> \example{
+;;> (let ()
+;;>   (define-record-type employee
+;;>     (make-employee name title)
+;;>     employee?
+;;>     (name get-name)
+;;>     (title get-title))
+;;>   (match (make-employee "Bob" "Doctor")
+;;>     (($ employee n t) (list t n))))
+;;> }
+
+;;> For records with more fields it can be helpful to match them by
+;;> name rather than position.  For this you can use the \scheme{@}
+;;> operator, originally a Gauche extension:
+
+;;> \example{
+;;> (let ()
+;;>   (define-record-type employee
+;;>     (make-employee name title)
+;;>     employee?
+;;>     (name get-name)
+;;>     (title get-title))
+;;>   (match (make-employee "Bob" "Doctor")
+;;>     ((@ employee (title t) (name n)) (list t n))))
+;;> }
+
+;;> The \scheme{set!} and \scheme{get!} operators are used to bind an
+;;> identifier to the setter and getter of a field, respectively.  The
+;;> setter is a procedure of one argument, which mutates the field to
+;;> that argument.  The getter is a procedure of no arguments which
+;;> returns the current value of the field.
+
+;;> \example{(let ((x (cons 1 2))) (match x ((1 . (set! s)) (s 3) x)))}
+;;> \example{(match '(1 . 2) ((1 . (get! g)) (g)))}
+
+;;> The new operator \scheme{***} can be used to search a tree for
+;;> subpatterns.  A pattern of the form \scheme{(x *** y)} represents
+;;> the subpattern \var{y} located somewhere in a tree where the path
+;;> from the current object to \var{y} can be seen as a list of the
+;;> form \scheme{(x ...)}.  \var{y} can immediately match the current
+;;> object in which case the path is the empty list.  In a sense it's
+;;> a 2-dimensional version of the \scheme{...} pattern.
+
+;;> As a common case the pattern \scheme{(_ *** y)} can be used to
+;;> search for \var{y} anywhere in a tree, regardless of the path
+;;> used.
+
+;;> \example{(match '(a (a (a b))) ((x *** 'b) x))}
+;;> \example{(match '(a (b) (c (d e) (f g))) ((x *** 'g) x))}
+
+;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
+;; Notes
+
+;; The implementation is a simple generative pattern matcher - each
+;; pattern is expanded into the required tests, calling a failure
+;; continuation if the tests fail.  This makes the logic easy to
+;; follow and extend, but produces sub-optimal code in cases where you
+;; have many similar clauses due to repeating the same tests.
+;; Nonetheless a smart compiler should be able to remove the redundant
+;; tests.  For MATCH-LET and DESTRUCTURING-BIND type uses there is no
+;; performance hit.
+
+;; The original version was written on 2006/11/29 and described in the
+;; following Usenet post:
+;;   http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.scheme/msg/0941234de7112ffd
+;; and is still available at
+;;   http://synthcode.com/scheme/match-simple.scm
+;; It's just 80 lines for the core MATCH, and an extra 40 lines for
+;; MATCH-LET, MATCH-LAMBDA and other syntactic sugar.
+;;
+;; A variant of this file which uses COND-EXPAND in a few places for
+;; performance can be found at
+;;   http://synthcode.com/scheme/match-cond-expand.scm
+;;
+;; 2015/05/09 - fixing bug in var extraction of quasiquote patterns
+;; 2014/11/24 - adding Gauche's `@' pattern for named record field matching
+;; 2012/12/26 - wrapping match-let&co body in lexical closure
+;; 2012/11/28 - fixing typo s/vetor/vector in largely unused set! code
+;; 2012/05/23 - fixing combinatorial explosion of code in certain or patterns
+;; 2011/09/25 - fixing bug when directly matching an identifier repeated in
+;;              the pattern (thanks to Stefan Israelsson Tampe)
+;; 2011/01/27 - fixing bug when matching tail patterns against improper lists
+;; 2010/09/26 - adding `..1' patterns (thanks to Ludovic Courtès)
+;; 2010/09/07 - fixing identifier extraction in some `...' and `***' patterns
+;; 2009/11/25 - adding `***' tree search patterns
+;; 2008/03/20 - fixing bug where (a ...) matched non-lists
+;; 2008/03/15 - removing redundant check in vector patterns
+;; 2008/03/06 - you can use `...' portably now (thanks to Taylor Campbell)
+;; 2007/09/04 - fixing quasiquote patterns
+;; 2007/07/21 - allowing ellipsis patterns in non-final list positions
+;; 2007/04/10 - fixing potential hygiene issue in match-check-ellipsis
+;;              (thanks to Taylor Campbell)
+;; 2007/04/08 - clean up, commenting
+;; 2006/12/24 - bugfixes
+;; 2006/12/01 - non-linear patterns, shared variables in OR, get!/set!
+
+;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
+;; force compile-time syntax errors with useful messages
+
+(define-syntax match-syntax-error
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_) (match-syntax-error "invalid match-syntax-error usage"))))
+
+;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
+
+;;> \section{Syntax}
+
+;;> \macro{(match expr (pattern . body) ...)\br{}
+;;> (match expr (pattern (=> failure) . body) ...)}
+
+;;> The result of \var{expr} is matched against each \var{pattern} in
+;;> turn, according to the pattern rules described in the previous
+;;> section, until the the first \var{pattern} matches.  When a match is
+;;> found, the corresponding \var{body}s are evaluated in order,
+;;> and the result of the last expression is returned as the result
+;;> of the entire \scheme{match}.  If a \var{failure} is provided,
+;;> then it is bound to a procedure of no arguments which continues,
+;;> processing at the next \var{pattern}.  If no \var{pattern} matches,
+;;> an error is signalled.
+
+;; The basic interface.  MATCH just performs some basic syntax
+;; validation, binds the match expression to a temporary variable `v',
+;; and passes it on to MATCH-NEXT.  It's a constant throughout the
+;; code below that the binding `v' is a direct variable reference, not
+;; an expression.
+
+(define-syntax match
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((match)
+     (match-syntax-error "missing match expression"))
+    ((match atom)
+     (match-syntax-error "no match clauses"))
+    ((match (app ...) (pat . body) ...)
+     (let ((v (app ...)))
+       (match-next v ((app ...) (set! (app ...))) (pat . body) ...)))
+    ((match #(vec ...) (pat . body) ...)
+     (let ((v #(vec ...)))
+       (match-next v (v (set! v)) (pat . body) ...)))
+    ((match atom (pat . body) ...)
+     (let ((v atom))
+       (match-next v (atom (set! atom)) (pat . body) ...)))
+    ))
+
+;; MATCH-NEXT passes each clause to MATCH-ONE in turn with its failure
+;; thunk, which is expanded by recursing MATCH-NEXT on the remaining
+;; clauses.  `g+s' is a list of two elements, the get! and set!
+;; expressions respectively.
+
+(define-syntax match-next
+  (syntax-rules (=>)
+    ;; no more clauses, the match failed
+    ((match-next v g+s)
+     (error 'match "no matching pattern"))
+    ;; named failure continuation
+    ((match-next v g+s (pat (=> failure) . body) . rest)
+     (let ((failure (lambda () (match-next v g+s . rest))))
+       ;; match-one analyzes the pattern for us
+       (match-one v pat g+s (match-drop-ids (begin . body)) (failure) ())))
+    ;; anonymous failure continuation, give it a dummy name
+    ((match-next v g+s (pat . body) . rest)
+     (match-next v g+s (pat (=> failure) . body) . rest))))
+
+;; MATCH-ONE first checks for ellipsis patterns, otherwise passes on to
+;; MATCH-TWO.
+
+(define-syntax match-one
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ;; If it's a list of two or more values, check to see if the
+    ;; second one is an ellipsis and handle accordingly, otherwise go
+    ;; to MATCH-TWO.
+    ((match-one v (p q . r) g+s sk fk i)
+     (match-check-ellipsis
+      q
+      (match-extract-vars p (match-gen-ellipsis v p r  g+s sk fk i) i ())
+      (match-two v (p q . r) g+s sk fk i)))
+    ;; Go directly to MATCH-TWO.
+    ((match-one . x)
+     (match-two . x))))
+
+;; This is the guts of the pattern matcher.  We are passed a lot of
+;; information in the form:
+;;
+;;   (match-two var pattern getter setter success-k fail-k (ids ...))
+;;
+;; usually abbreviated
+;;
+;;   (match-two v p g+s sk fk i)
+;;
+;; where VAR is the symbol name of the current variable we are
+;; matching, PATTERN is the current pattern, getter and setter are the
+;; corresponding accessors (e.g. CAR and SET-CAR! of the pair holding
+;; VAR), SUCCESS-K is the success continuation, FAIL-K is the failure
+;; continuation (which is just a thunk call and is thus safe to expand
+;; multiple times) and IDS are the list of identifiers bound in the
+;; pattern so far.
+
+(define-syntax match-two
+  (syntax-rules (_ ___ ..1 *** quote quasiquote ? $ struct @ object = and or not set! get!)
+    ((match-two v () g+s (sk ...) fk i)
+     (if (null? v) (sk ... i) fk))
+    ((match-two v (quote p) g+s (sk ...) fk i)
+     (if (equal? v 'p) (sk ... i) fk))
+    ((match-two v (quasiquote p) . x)
+     (match-quasiquote v p . x))
+    ((match-two v (and) g+s (sk ...) fk i) (sk ... i))
+    ((match-two v (and p q ...) g+s sk fk i)
+     (match-one v p g+s (match-one v (and q ...) g+s sk fk) fk i))
+    ((match-two v (or) g+s sk fk i) fk)
+    ((match-two v (or p) . x)
+     (match-one v p . x))
+    ((match-two v (or p ...) g+s sk fk i)
+     (match-extract-vars (or p ...) (match-gen-or v (p ...) g+s sk fk i) i ()))
+    ((match-two v (not p) g+s (sk ...) fk i)
+     (match-one v p g+s (match-drop-ids fk) (sk ... i) i))
+    ((match-two v (get! getter) (g s) (sk ...) fk i)
+     (let ((getter (lambda () g))) (sk ... i)))
+    ((match-two v (set! setter) (g (s ...)) (sk ...) fk i)
+     (let ((setter (lambda (x) (s ... x)))) (sk ... i)))
+    ((match-two v (? pred . p) g+s sk fk i)
+     (if (pred v) (match-one v (and . p) g+s sk fk i) fk))
+    ((match-two v (= proc p) . x)
+     (let ((w (proc v))) (match-one w p . x)))
+    ((match-two v (p ___ . r) g+s sk fk i)
+     (match-extract-vars p (match-gen-ellipsis v p r g+s sk fk i) i ()))
+    ((match-two v (p) g+s sk fk i)
+     (if (and (pair? v) (null? (cdr v)))
+         (let ((w (car v)))
+           (match-one w p ((car v) (set-car! v)) sk fk i))
+         fk))
+    ((match-two v (p *** q) g+s sk fk i)
+     (match-extract-vars p (match-gen-search v p q g+s sk fk i) i ()))
+    ((match-two v (p *** . q) g+s sk fk i)
+     (match-syntax-error "invalid use of ***" (p *** . q)))
+    ((match-two v (p ..1) g+s sk fk i)
+     (if (pair? v)
+         (match-one v (p ___) g+s sk fk i)
+         fk))
+    ((match-two v ($ rec p ...) g+s sk fk i)
+     (if (is-a? v rec)
+         (match-record-refs v rec 0 (p ...) g+s sk fk i)
+         fk))
+    ((match-two v (struct rec p ...) g+s sk fk i)
+     (if (is-a? v rec)
+         (match-record-refs v rec 0 (p ...) g+s sk fk i)
+         fk))
+    ((match-two v (@ rec p ...) g+s sk fk i)
+     (if (is-a? v rec)
+         (match-record-named-refs v rec (p ...) g+s sk fk i)
+         fk))
+    ((match-two v (object rec p ...) g+s sk fk i)
+     (if (is-a? v rec)
+         (match-record-named-refs v rec (p ...) g+s sk fk i)
+         fk))
+    ((match-two v (p . q) g+s sk fk i)
+     (if (pair? v)
+         (let ((w (car v)) (x (cdr v)))
+           (match-one w p ((car v) (set-car! v))
+                      (match-one x q ((cdr v) (set-cdr! v)) sk fk)
+                      fk
+                      i))
+         fk))
+    ((match-two v #(p ...) g+s . x)
+     (match-vector v 0 () (p ...) . x))
+    ((match-two v _ g+s (sk ...) fk i) (sk ... i))
+    ;; Not a pair or vector or special literal, test to see if it's a
+    ;; new symbol, in which case we just bind it, or if it's an
+    ;; already bound symbol or some other literal, in which case we
+    ;; compare it with EQUAL?.
+    ((match-two v x g+s (sk ...) fk (id ...))
+     (let-syntax
+         ((new-sym?
+           (syntax-rules (id ...)
+             ((new-sym? x sk2 fk2) sk2)
+             ((new-sym? y sk2 fk2) fk2))))
+       (new-sym? random-sym-to-match
+                 (let ((x v)) (sk ... (id ... x)))
+                 (if (equal? v x) (sk ... (id ...)) fk))))
+    ))
+
+;; QUASIQUOTE patterns
+
+(define-syntax match-quasiquote
+  (syntax-rules (unquote unquote-splicing quasiquote)
+    ((_ v (unquote p) g+s sk fk i)
+     (match-one v p g+s sk fk i))
+    ((_ v ((unquote-splicing p) . rest) g+s sk fk i)
+     (if (pair? v)
+       (match-one v
+                  (p . tmp)
+                  (match-quasiquote tmp rest g+s sk fk)
+                  fk
+                  i)
+       fk))
+    ((_ v (quasiquote p) g+s sk fk i . depth)
+     (match-quasiquote v p g+s sk fk i #f . depth))
+    ((_ v (unquote p) g+s sk fk i x . depth)
+     (match-quasiquote v p g+s sk fk i . depth))
+    ((_ v (unquote-splicing p) g+s sk fk i x . depth)
+     (match-quasiquote v p g+s sk fk i . depth))
+    ((_ v (p . q) g+s sk fk i . depth)
+     (if (pair? v)
+       (let ((w (car v)) (x (cdr v)))
+         (match-quasiquote
+          w p g+s
+          (match-quasiquote-step x q g+s sk fk depth)
+          fk i . depth))
+       fk))
+    ((_ v #(elt ...) g+s sk fk i . depth)
+     (if (vector? v)
+       (let ((ls (vector->list v)))
+         (match-quasiquote ls (elt ...) g+s sk fk i . depth))
+       fk))
+    ((_ v x g+s sk fk i . depth)
+     (match-one v 'x g+s sk fk i))))
+
+(define-syntax match-quasiquote-step
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((match-quasiquote-step x q g+s sk fk depth i)
+     (match-quasiquote x q g+s sk fk i . depth))))
+
+;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
+;; Utilities
+
+;; Takes two values and just expands into the first.
+(define-syntax match-drop-ids
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ expr ids ...) expr)))
+
+(define-syntax match-tuck-ids
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ (letish args (expr ...)) ids ...)
+     (letish args (expr ... ids ...)))))
+
+(define-syntax match-drop-first-arg
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ arg expr) expr)))
+
+;; To expand an OR group we try each clause in succession, passing the
+;; first that succeeds to the success continuation.  On failure for
+;; any clause, we just try the next clause, finally resorting to the
+;; failure continuation fk if all clauses fail.  The only trick is
+;; that we want to unify the identifiers, so that the success
+;; continuation can refer to a variable from any of the OR clauses.
+
+(define-syntax match-gen-or
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ v p g+s (sk ...) fk (i ...) ((id id-ls) ...))
+     (let ((sk2 (lambda (id ...) (sk ... (i ... id ...)))))
+       (match-gen-or-step v p g+s (match-drop-ids (sk2 id ...)) fk (i ...))))))
+
+(define-syntax match-gen-or-step
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ v () g+s sk fk . x)
+     ;; no OR clauses, call the failure continuation
+     fk)
+    ((_ v (p) . x)
+     ;; last (or only) OR clause, just expand normally
+     (match-one v p . x))
+    ((_ v (p . q) g+s sk fk i)
+     ;; match one and try the remaining on failure
+     (let ((fk2 (lambda () (match-gen-or-step v q g+s sk fk i))))
+       (match-one v p g+s sk (fk2) i)))
+    ))
+
+;; We match a pattern (p ...) by matching the pattern p in a loop on
+;; each element of the variable, accumulating the bound ids into lists.
+
+;; Look at the body of the simple case - it's just a named let loop,
+;; matching each element in turn to the same pattern.  The only trick
+;; is that we want to keep track of the lists of each extracted id, so
+;; when the loop recurses we cons the ids onto their respective list
+;; variables, and on success we bind the ids (what the user input and
+;; expects to see in the success body) to the reversed accumulated
+;; list IDs.
+
+(define-syntax match-gen-ellipsis
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ v p () g+s (sk ...) fk i ((id id-ls) ...))
+     (match-check-identifier p
+       ;; simplest case equivalent to (p ...), just bind the list
+       (let ((p v))
+         (if (list? p)
+             (sk ... i)
+             fk))
+       ;; simple case, match all elements of the list
+       (let loop ((ls v) (id-ls '()) ...)
+         (cond
+           ((null? ls)
+            (let ((id (reverse id-ls)) ...) (sk ... i)))
+           ((pair? ls)
+            (let ((w (car ls)))
+              (match-one w p ((car ls) (set-car! ls))
+                         (match-drop-ids (loop (cdr ls) (cons id id-ls) ...))
+                         fk i)))
+           (else
+            fk)))))
+    ((_ v p r g+s (sk ...) fk i ((id id-ls) ...))
+     ;; general case, trailing patterns to match, keep track of the
+     ;; remaining list length so we don't need any backtracking
+     (match-verify-no-ellipsis
+      r
+      (let* ((tail-len (length 'r))
+             (ls v)
+             (len (and (list? ls) (length ls))))
+        (if (or (not len) (< len tail-len))
+            fk
+            (let loop ((ls ls) (n len) (id-ls '()) ...)
+              (cond
+                ((= n tail-len)
+                 (let ((id (reverse id-ls)) ...)
+                   (match-one ls r (#f #f) (sk ...) fk i)))
+                ((pair? ls)
+                 (let ((w (car ls)))
+                   (match-one w p ((car ls) (set-car! ls))
+                              (match-drop-ids
+                               (loop (cdr ls) (- n 1) (cons id id-ls) ...))
+                              fk
+                              i)))
+                (else
+                 fk)))))))))
+
+;; This is just a safety check.  Although unlike syntax-rules we allow
+;; trailing patterns after an ellipsis, we explicitly disable multiple
+;; ellipsis at the same level.  This is because in the general case
+;; such patterns are exponential in the number of ellipsis, and we
+;; don't want to make it easy to construct very expensive operations
+;; with simple looking patterns.  For example, it would be O(n^2) for
+;; patterns like (a ... b ...) because we must consider every trailing
+;; element for every possible break for the leading "a ...".
+
+(define-syntax match-verify-no-ellipsis
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ (x . y) sk)
+     (match-check-ellipsis
+      x
+      (match-syntax-error
+       "multiple ellipsis patterns not allowed at same level")
+      (match-verify-no-ellipsis y sk)))
+    ((_ () sk)
+     sk)
+    ((_ x sk)
+     (match-syntax-error "dotted tail not allowed after ellipsis" x))))
+
+;; To implement the tree search, we use two recursive procedures.  TRY
+;; attempts to match Y once, and on success it calls the normal SK on
+;; the accumulated list ids as in MATCH-GEN-ELLIPSIS.  On failure, we
+;; call NEXT which first checks if the current value is a list
+;; beginning with X, then calls TRY on each remaining element of the
+;; list.  Since TRY will recursively call NEXT again on failure, this
+;; effects a full depth-first search.
+;;
+;; The failure continuation throughout is a jump to the next step in
+;; the tree search, initialized with the original failure continuation
+;; FK.
+
+(define-syntax match-gen-search
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((match-gen-search v p q g+s sk fk i ((id id-ls) ...))
+     (letrec ((try (lambda (w fail id-ls ...)
+                     (match-one w q g+s
+                                (match-tuck-ids
+                                 (let ((id (reverse id-ls)) ...)
+                                   sk))
+                                (next w fail id-ls ...) i)))
+              (next (lambda (w fail id-ls ...)
+                      (if (not (pair? w))
+                          (fail)
+                          (let ((u (car w)))
+                            (match-one
+                             u p ((car w) (set-car! w))
+                             (match-drop-ids
+                              ;; accumulate the head variables from
+                              ;; the p pattern, and loop over the tail
+                              (let ((id-ls (cons id id-ls)) ...)
+                                (let lp ((ls (cdr w)))
+                                  (if (pair? ls)
+                                      (try (car ls)
+                                           (lambda () (lp (cdr ls)))
+                                           id-ls ...)
+                                      (fail)))))
+                             (fail) i))))))
+       ;; the initial id-ls binding here is a dummy to get the right
+       ;; number of '()s
+       (let ((id-ls '()) ...)
+         (try v (lambda () fk) id-ls ...))))))
+
+;; Vector patterns are just more of the same, with the slight
+;; exception that we pass around the current vector index being
+;; matched.
+
+(define-syntax match-vector
+  (syntax-rules (___)
+    ((_ v n pats (p q) . x)
+     (match-check-ellipsis q
+                          (match-gen-vector-ellipsis v n pats p . x)
+                          (match-vector-two v n pats (p q) . x)))
+    ((_ v n pats (p ___) sk fk i)
+     (match-gen-vector-ellipsis v n pats p sk fk i))
+    ((_ . x)
+     (match-vector-two . x))))
+
+;; Check the exact vector length, then check each element in turn.
+
+(define-syntax match-vector-two
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ v n ((pat index) ...) () sk fk i)
+     (if (vector? v)
+         (let ((len (vector-length v)))
+           (if (= len n)
+               (match-vector-step v ((pat index) ...) sk fk i)
+               fk))
+         fk))
+    ((_ v n (pats ...) (p . q) . x)
+     (match-vector v (+ n 1) (pats ... (p n)) q . x))))
+
+(define-syntax match-vector-step
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ v () (sk ...) fk i) (sk ... i))
+    ((_ v ((pat index) . rest) sk fk i)
+     (let ((w (vector-ref v index)))
+       (match-one w pat ((vector-ref v index) (vector-set! v index))
+                  (match-vector-step v rest sk fk)
+                  fk i)))))
+
+;; With a vector ellipsis pattern we first check to see if the vector
+;; length is at least the required length.
+
+(define-syntax match-gen-vector-ellipsis
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ v n ((pat index) ...) p sk fk i)
+     (if (vector? v)
+       (let ((len (vector-length v)))
+         (if (>= len n)
+           (match-vector-step v ((pat index) ...)
+                              (match-vector-tail v p n len sk fk)
+                              fk i)
+           fk))
+       fk))))
+
+(define-syntax match-vector-tail
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ v p n len sk fk i)
+     (match-extract-vars p (match-vector-tail-two v p n len sk fk i) i ()))))
+
+(define-syntax match-vector-tail-two
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ v p n len (sk ...) fk i ((id id-ls) ...))
+     (let loop ((j n) (id-ls '()) ...)
+       (if (>= j len)
+         (let ((id (reverse id-ls)) ...) (sk ... i))
+         (let ((w (vector-ref v j)))
+           (match-one w p ((vector-ref v j) (vector-set! v j))
+                      (match-drop-ids (loop (+ j 1) (cons id id-ls) ...))
+                      fk i)))))))
+
+(define-syntax match-record-refs
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ v rec n (p . q) g+s sk fk i)
+     (let ((w (slot-ref rec v n)))
+       (match-one w p ((slot-ref rec v n) (slot-set! rec v n))
+                  (match-record-refs v rec (+ n 1) q g+s sk fk) fk i)))
+    ((_ v rec n () g+s (sk ...) fk i)
+     (sk ... i))))
+
+(define-syntax match-record-named-refs
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ v rec ((f p) . q) g+s sk fk i)
+     (let ((w (slot-ref rec v 'f)))
+       (match-one w p ((slot-ref rec v 'f) (slot-set! rec v 'f))
+                  (match-record-named-refs v rec q g+s sk fk) fk i)))
+    ((_ v rec () g+s (sk ...) fk i)
+     (sk ... i))))
+
+;; Extract all identifiers in a pattern.  A little more complicated
+;; than just looking for symbols, we need to ignore special keywords
+;; and non-pattern forms (such as the predicate expression in ?
+;; patterns), and also ignore previously bound identifiers.
+;;
+;; Calls the continuation with all new vars as a list of the form
+;; ((orig-var tmp-name) ...), where tmp-name can be used to uniquely
+;; pair with the original variable (e.g. it's used in the ellipsis
+;; generation for list variables).
+;;
+;; (match-extract-vars pattern continuation (ids ...) (new-vars ...))
+
+(define-syntax match-extract-vars
+  (syntax-rules (_ ___ ..1 *** ? $ struct @ object = quote quasiquote and or not get! set!)
+    ((match-extract-vars (? pred . p) . x)
+     (match-extract-vars p . x))
+    ((match-extract-vars ($ rec . p) . x)
+     (match-extract-vars p . x))
+    ((match-extract-vars (struct rec . p) . x)
+     (match-extract-vars p . x))
+    ((match-extract-vars (@ rec (f p) ...) . x)
+     (match-extract-vars (p ...) . x))
+    ((match-extract-vars (object rec (f p) ...) . x)
+     (match-extract-vars (p ...) . x))
+    ((match-extract-vars (= proc p) . x)
+     (match-extract-vars p . x))
+    ((match-extract-vars (quote x) (k ...) i v)
+     (k ... v))
+    ((match-extract-vars (quasiquote x) k i v)
+     (match-extract-quasiquote-vars x k i v (#t)))
+    ((match-extract-vars (and . p) . x)
+     (match-extract-vars p . x))
+    ((match-extract-vars (or . p) . x)
+     (match-extract-vars p . x))
+    ((match-extract-vars (not . p) . x)
+     (match-extract-vars p . x))
+    ;; A non-keyword pair, expand the CAR with a continuation to
+    ;; expand the CDR.
+    ((match-extract-vars (p q . r) k i v)
+     (match-check-ellipsis
+      q
+      (match-extract-vars (p . r) k i v)
+      (match-extract-vars p (match-extract-vars-step (q . r) k i v) i ())))
+    ((match-extract-vars (p . q) k i v)
+     (match-extract-vars p (match-extract-vars-step q k i v) i ()))
+    ((match-extract-vars #(p ...) . x)
+     (match-extract-vars (p ...) . x))
+    ((match-extract-vars _ (k ...) i v)    (k ... v))
+    ((match-extract-vars ___ (k ...) i v)  (k ... v))
+    ((match-extract-vars *** (k ...) i v)  (k ... v))
+    ((match-extract-vars ..1 (k ...) i v)  (k ... v))
+    ;; This is the main part, the only place where we might add a new
+    ;; var if it's an unbound symbol.
+    ((match-extract-vars p (k ...) (i ...) v)
+     (let-syntax
+         ((new-sym?
+           (syntax-rules (i ...)
+             ((new-sym? p sk fk) sk)
+             ((new-sym? any sk fk) fk))))
+       (new-sym? random-sym-to-match
+                 (k ... ((p p-ls) . v))
+                 (k ... v))))
+    ))
+
+;; Stepper used in the above so it can expand the CAR and CDR
+;; separately.
+
+(define-syntax match-extract-vars-step
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ p k i v ((v2 v2-ls) ...))
+     (match-extract-vars p k (v2 ... . i) ((v2 v2-ls) ... . v)))
+    ))
+
+(define-syntax match-extract-quasiquote-vars
+  (syntax-rules (quasiquote unquote unquote-splicing)
+    ((match-extract-quasiquote-vars (quasiquote x) k i v d)
+     (match-extract-quasiquote-vars x k i v (#t . d)))
+    ((match-extract-quasiquote-vars (unquote-splicing x) k i v d)
+     (match-extract-quasiquote-vars (unquote x) k i v d))
+    ((match-extract-quasiquote-vars (unquote x) k i v (#t))
+     (match-extract-vars x k i v))
+    ((match-extract-quasiquote-vars (unquote x) k i v (#t . d))
+     (match-extract-quasiquote-vars x k i v d))
+    ((match-extract-quasiquote-vars (x . y) k i v d)
+     (match-extract-quasiquote-vars
+      x
+      (match-extract-quasiquote-vars-step y k i v d) i () d))
+    ((match-extract-quasiquote-vars #(x ...) k i v d)
+     (match-extract-quasiquote-vars (x ...) k i v d))
+    ((match-extract-quasiquote-vars x (k ...) i v d)
+     (k ... v))
+    ))
+
+(define-syntax match-extract-quasiquote-vars-step
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ x k i v d ((v2 v2-ls) ...))
+     (match-extract-quasiquote-vars x k (v2 ... . i) ((v2 v2-ls) ... . v) d))
+    ))
+
+
+;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
+;; Gimme some sugar baby.
+
+;;> Shortcut for \scheme{lambda} + \scheme{match}.  Creates a
+;;> procedure of one argument, and matches that argument against each
+;;> clause.
+
+(define-syntax match-lambda
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ (pattern . body) ...) (lambda (expr) (match expr (pattern . body) ...)))))
+
+;;> Similar to \scheme{match-lambda}.  Creates a procedure of any
+;;> number of arguments, and matches the argument list against each
+;;> clause.
+
+(define-syntax match-lambda*
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ (pattern . body) ...) (lambda expr (match expr (pattern . body) ...)))))
+
+;;> Matches each var to the corresponding expression, and evaluates
+;;> the body with all match variables in scope.  Raises an error if
+;;> any of the expressions fail to match.  Syntax analogous to named
+;;> let can also be used for recursive functions which match on their
+;;> arguments as in \scheme{match-lambda*}.
+
+(define-syntax match-let
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ ((var value) ...) . body)
+     (match-let/helper let () () ((var value) ...) . body))
+    ((_ loop ((var init) ...) . body)
+     (match-named-let loop ((var init) ...) . body))))
+
+;;> Similar to \scheme{match-let}, but analogously to \scheme{letrec}
+;;> matches and binds the variables with all match variables in scope.
+
+(define-syntax match-letrec
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ ((var value) ...) . body)
+     (match-let/helper letrec () () ((var value) ...) . body))))
+
+(define-syntax match-let/helper
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ let ((var expr) ...) () () . body)
+     (let ((var expr) ...) . body))
+    ((_ let ((var expr) ...) ((pat tmp) ...) () . body)
+     (let ((var expr) ...)
+       (match-let* ((pat tmp) ...)
+         . body)))
+    ((_ let (v ...) (p ...) (((a . b) expr) . rest) . body)
+     (match-let/helper
+      let (v ... (tmp expr)) (p ... ((a . b) tmp)) rest . body))
+    ((_ let (v ...) (p ...) ((#(a ...) expr) . rest) . body)
+     (match-let/helper
+      let (v ... (tmp expr)) (p ... (#(a ...) tmp)) rest . body))
+    ((_ let (v ...) (p ...) ((a expr) . rest) . body)
+     (match-let/helper let (v ... (a expr)) (p ...) rest . body))))
+
+(define-syntax match-named-let
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ loop ((pat expr var) ...) () . body)
+     (let loop ((var expr) ...)
+       (match-let ((pat var) ...)
+         . body)))
+    ((_ loop (v ...) ((pat expr) . rest) . body)
+     (match-named-let loop (v ... (pat expr tmp)) rest . body))))
+
+;;> \macro{(match-let* ((var value) ...) body ...)}
+
+;;> Similar to \scheme{match-let}, but analogously to \scheme{let*}
+;;> matches and binds the variables in sequence, with preceding match
+;;> variables in scope.
+
+(define-syntax match-let*
+  (syntax-rules ()
+    ((_ () . body)
+     (let () . body))
+    ((_ ((pat expr) . rest) . body)
+     (match expr (pat (match-let* rest . body))))))
+
+
+;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
+;; Otherwise COND-EXPANDed bits.
+
+(cond-expand
+ (chibi
+  (define-syntax match-check-ellipsis
+    (er-macro-transformer
+     (lambda (expr rename compare)
+       (if (compare '... (cadr expr))
+           (car (cddr expr))
+           (cadr (cddr expr))))))
+  (define-syntax match-check-identifier
+    (er-macro-transformer
+     (lambda (expr rename compare)
+       (if (identifier? (cadr expr))
+           (car (cddr expr))
+           (cadr (cddr expr)))))))
+
+ (else
+  ;; Portable versions
+  ;;
+  ;; This *should* work, but doesn't :(
+  ;;   (define-syntax match-check-ellipsis
+  ;;     (syntax-rules (...)
+  ;;       ((_ ... sk fk) sk)
+  ;;       ((_ x sk fk) fk)))
+  ;;
+  ;; This is a little more complicated, and introduces a new let-syntax,
+  ;; but should work portably in any R[56]RS Scheme.  Taylor Campbell
+  ;; originally came up with the idea.
+  (define-syntax match-check-ellipsis
+    (syntax-rules ()
+      ;; these two aren't necessary but provide fast-case failures
+      ((match-check-ellipsis (a . b) success-k failure-k) failure-k)
+      ((match-check-ellipsis #(a ...) success-k failure-k) failure-k)
+      ;; matching an atom
+      ((match-check-ellipsis id success-k failure-k)
+       (let-syntax ((ellipsis? (syntax-rules ()
+                                 ;; iff `id' is `...' here then this will
+                                 ;; match a list of any length
+                                 ((ellipsis? (foo id) sk fk) sk)
+                                 ((ellipsis? other sk fk) fk))))
+         ;; this list of three elements will only match the (foo id) list
+         ;; above if `id' is `...'
+         (ellipsis? (a b c) success-k failure-k)))))
+
+  ;; This is portable but can be more efficient with non-portable
+  ;; extensions.  This trick was originally discovered by Oleg Kiselyov.
+  (define-syntax match-check-identifier
+    (syntax-rules ()
+      ;; fast-case failures, lists and vectors are not identifiers
+      ((_ (x . y) success-k failure-k) failure-k)
+      ((_ #(x ...) success-k failure-k) failure-k)
+      ;; x is an atom
+      ((_ x success-k failure-k)
+       (let-syntax
+           ((sym?
+             (syntax-rules ()
+               ;; if the symbol `abracadabra' matches x, then x is a
+               ;; symbol
+               ((sym? x sk fk) sk)
+               ;; otherwise x is a non-symbol datum
+               ((sym? y sk fk) fk))))
+         (sym? abracadabra success-k failure-k)))))))