I'll pushed an improved version of the test macro shortly. Jay
On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Matthew Flatt <mfl...@cs.utah.edu> wrote: > At Wed, 7 Mar 2012 10:14:35 -0700, Matthew Flatt wrote: >> I've added "submodules" to a version of Racket labeled v5.2.900.1 > > Submodules are now pushed to the Racket git repo. > > > I haven't yet added a syntactic form to simplify > > (module* main #f > ....) > > My first idea was `main', as in > > (main > ....) > > but that seems too quiet and likely to create collisions. (It does > create a collision in part of the contract library, which imports > `racket/base' for syntax and defines a for-syntax `main' function.) > > Jon suggests `submodule': > > (submodule main > ...) > > This suggestion has the advantage of replacing all `(module* .... #f > ....)' combinations, and mostly I like this direction. However, > `submodule' would be only one way to define a "submodule", while > `submod' in a module path corresponds to "submodule" in the more > general sense. It could be that `submodule' is on the right path and > other terminology should change, or maybe there's a more specific word > to use for a `(module* .... #f ....)' replacement instead of `submodule'. > > _________________________ > Racket Developers list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev -- Jay McCarthy <j...@cs.byu.edu> Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University http://faculty.cs.byu.edu/~jay "The glory of God is Intelligence" - D&C 93 _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
