Just now, Matthew Flatt wrote: > > I guess we should try this, but I think we should keep it specific > to bytecode loading. That is, I don't think we should try to splice > a .zip-based filesystem into Racket's core filesystem operations.
That's what I had in mind, though splicing a zip at the lower level is tempting for an even easier distribution of content... But it sounds better to avoid it and instead, when needed, go for the lowlevel hooks so that any arbitrary code could be plugged in to access files. [ BTW, a cute mini project would be to start with some bindings to FUSE, then have a single racket process that has code for implementing a FS and also use it -- so you end up having racket code that implements the access, and code that uses it. But I think that there's no per-process local mounting via fuse... ] -- ((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