Sorry for the delay (I was moving earlier this week).
Thank you for taking a crack at the task. One question I have is whether or
not the scopes feature is something which I can more or less count on being
available in future versions of Racket (I understand that it's from a
snapshot and might
At Fri, 15 May 2015 11:09:25 -0400, Philip Blair wrote:
One question I have is whether or
not the scopes feature is something which I can more or less count on being
available in future versions of Racket
That's not yet clear.
Although most existing code would be unaffected by the change to a
On May 10, 2015, at 19:04, Matthias Felleisen matth...@ccs.neu.edu wrote:
Probably off-topic: you might be interested in
http://repository.readscheme.org/ftp/papers/sw2003/Scmxlate.pdf
Start with the title and then the summary at the end. Dorai has used this
package to make his
I've fought my way a little up the hill, and enclosed is an
implementation that I think works the way you want within a module.
See the enclosed in-package.rkt.
As you suspected, `make-syntax-introducer` is the piece that you need.
In the terminology of the current macro expander, the function
Probably off-topic: you might be interested in
http://repository.readscheme.org/ftp/papers/sw2003/Scmxlate.pdf
Start with the title and then the summary at the end. Dorai has used this
package to make his programs available in Schemes and Common Lisps.
-- Matthias
On May 8, 2015, at
That's good to know about namespaces being intended to be for runtime
reflection.
I understand what you mean when you say bindings and lexical context, but
in what specific way do you mean in the context of this issue?
I also feel that I should mention that I am having difficulty wrapping my
I agree that those sound goals sound like a poor fit for `module+`.
It's possible that `racket/package` provides something closer to the
namespace-management tools that you need.
Generally, I think you'll find more success by manipulating bindings
and lexical context (in the sense of
Hello,
I am working on a project in which I am trying to implement a Common Lisp-style
package system. A simple example of usage would be as follows:
(in-package FOO
(define BAR 2))
; ...
(in-package FOO
(define BAZ (add1 BAR)))
; ...
(in-package FOO
(add1 BAZ)) ;
8 matches
Mail list logo
