Re: [racket-dev] [plt] Push #25038: master branch updated
At Fri, 20 Jul 2012 16:17:22 -0400, as...@racket-lang.org wrote: 3582b57 Asumu Takikawa as...@racket-lang.org 2012-07-20 15:10 : | Move mzlib/defmacro = racket/defmacro I'm not sure this belongs in `racket'. This is not a Racket feature. It's closer to a CL compatibility library. How about having a `compatibility' collect, which would include this and things like `racket/package' (compatibility with Chez) and `racket/mpair' (compatibility with Scheme)? It would be harder to confuse these things with blessed Racket features. Vincent _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] [plt] Push #25038: master branch updated
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Vincent St-Amour stamo...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: At Fri, 20 Jul 2012 16:17:22 -0400, as...@racket-lang.org wrote: 3582b57 Asumu Takikawa as...@racket-lang.org 2012-07-20 15:10 : | Move mzlib/defmacro = racket/defmacro I'm not sure this belongs in `racket'. This is not a Racket feature. It's closer to a CL compatibility library. How about having a `compatibility' collect, which would include this and things like `racket/package' (compatibility with Chez) and `racket/mpair' (compatibility with Scheme)? It would be harder to confuse these things with blessed Racket features. Vincent +1 For backwards (ahem) compatibility, we would have to maintain the racket/package and racket/mpair names as aliases, but changing existing uses of them to the new name and making the racket/ documentation point to compatibility/ would help make the point. --Carl _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] [plt] Push #25038: master branch updated
On 07/20/2012 04:36 PM, Carl Eastlund wrote: On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Vincent St-Amourstamo...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: At Fri, 20 Jul 2012 16:17:22 -0400, as...@racket-lang.org wrote: 3582b57 Asumu Takikawaas...@racket-lang.org 2012-07-20 15:10 : | Move mzlib/defmacro = racket/defmacro I'm not sure this belongs in `racket'. This is not a Racket feature. It's closer to a CL compatibility library. How about having a `compatibility' collect, which would include this and things like `racket/package' (compatibility with Chez) and `racket/mpair' (compatibility with Scheme)? It would be harder to confuse these things with blessed Racket features. Vincent +1 For backwards (ahem) compatibility, we would have to maintain the racket/package and racket/mpair names as aliases, but changing existing uses of them to the new name and making the racket/ documentation point to compatibility/ would help make the point. -1 I think proliferating indirections and aliases is just as bad as (or maybe worse than) proliferating top-level collections. If it's in mzlib/ and it's still really useful, move it to racket/ (or data/, etc). If it isn't (eg, mzlib/defmacro, perhaps mzlib/thread), then just leave it alone. Ryan _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] [plt] Push #25038: master branch updated
++1 Sent from my iPhone On Jul 20, 2012, at 4:36 PM, Carl Eastlund c...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Vincent St-Amour stamo...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: At Fri, 20 Jul 2012 16:17:22 -0400, as...@racket-lang.org wrote: 3582b57 Asumu Takikawa as...@racket-lang.org 2012-07-20 15:10 : | Move mzlib/defmacro = racket/defmacro I'm not sure this belongs in `racket'. This is not a Racket feature. It's closer to a CL compatibility library. How about having a `compatibility' collect, which would include this and things like `racket/package' (compatibility with Chez) and `racket/mpair' (compatibility with Scheme)? It would be harder to confuse these things with blessed Racket features. Vincent +1 For backwards (ahem) compatibility, we would have to maintain the racket/package and racket/mpair names as aliases, but changing existing uses of them to the new name and making the racket/ documentation point to compatibility/ would help make the point. --Carl _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] [plt] Push #25038: master branch updated
Three hours ago, Vincent St-Amour wrote: I'm not sure this belongs in `racket'. This is not a Racket feature. It's closer to a CL compatibility library. +1 How about having a `compatibility' collect, which would include this and things like `racket/package' (compatibility with Chez) and `racket/mpair' (compatibility with Scheme)? It would be harder to confuse these things with blessed Racket features. +1 Two hours ago, Ryan Culpepper wrote: -1 I think proliferating indirections and aliases is just as bad as (or maybe worse than) proliferating top-level collections. If it's in mzlib/ and it's still really useful, move it to racket/ (or data/, etc). If it isn't (eg, mzlib/defmacro, perhaps mzlib/thread), then just leave it alone. +1 for the sentiment of having too many redirections both at the file level and at the binding level (like the many @scheme bindings in scribble). But OTOH, I did mention that one of the weird things when I talk about `defmacro' in class is the arbitrary looking mzlib... So I think that organized expirations address this nicely. Perhaps it's another argument in favor of throwing a syntax error at the end-of-life of a deprecated library/name, one that explicitly says use `compat/defmacro' instead of `mzlib/defmacro', and leaving that on for a release or two. This will save people a dig through the docs/mailing-list/google to find out how to change things. (BTW, I think that the `scheme' collection could go this way too.) -- ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay: http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life! _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] [plt] Push #25038: master branch updated
+ a lot On Jul 20, 2012, at 7:32 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote: (BTW, I think that the `scheme' collection could go this way too.) _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
