On Jun 28, 2011, at 10:02 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote: > > I do see a point in such a feature -- for example, IIUC, Matthew's > recent optimization to loading phase-1 code could be expressed inside > the language by making all `for-syntax' requires default to lazy > loading mode. But I doubt that such a thing will be added in the near > future...
My first paper ever was on require by-value (normal) require by-need (would be good for testing) require by-name (debugging) Perhaps we can convince Matthew. >> That's what I asked for, and this is what Jay's patch is supposed to >> address though I don't see how it does. Also, like Eli, I don't like >> the additional wrappers and with-deployment looks suspicious. > > Yes, I know what you asked for -- and Jay's thing is not addressing > that at all. My proposal (on the other thread) does, and avoids the > need for new wrappers. Agreed. _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
