On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Matthew Flatt <mfl...@cs.utah.edu> wrote:
> With this change, does `raco exe' still work? I think `lazy-require' > expands in a way that would require the `racket/place/distributed' > module to be present when creating an executable that uses > `racket/place'. What's the right way to test this? > Probably the right approach is to have a `#:node' argument effectively > carry `supervise-place-at' with it, so that `lazy-require' is not > needed. I don't understand how it would "carry `s-p-a` with it". What do you mean? Sam > At Thu, 18 Jul 2013 15:28:45 -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: >> I moved all of distributed places to a new package, which required the >> one change below. I'm not sure about whether this is a good idea, >> particularly because neither the `#:at` or `#:named` arguments to >> `dynamic-place` are mentioned at all in the documentation. Thoughts? >> >> Sam >> >> >> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 3:25 PM, <sa...@racket-lang.org> wrote: >> > >> > racket/lib/collects/racket/place.rkt >> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> > --- OLD/racket/lib/collects/racket/place.rkt >> > +++ NEW/racket/lib/collects/racket/place.rkt >> > @@ -81,7 +81,11 @@ >> > (define (dynamic-place module-path function #:at [node #f] #:named [named >> #f]) >> > (cond >> > [node >> > - (supervise-place-at node module-path function #:named named)] >> > + (unless (collection-file-path "distributed.rkt" "racket" "place" >> > + #:fail (lambda (x) #f)) >> > + (raise-arguments-error "dynamic-place" >> > + "distributed places are not available")) >> > + (supervise-place-at node module-path function #:named named)] >> > [else >> > (start-place 'dynamic-place module-path function >> > #f (current-output-port) (current-error-port))])) > _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
