On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Matthew Flatt <mfl...@cs.utah.edu> wrote: > At Thu, 18 Jul 2013 15:45:47 -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: >> 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? > > Try `raco exe' on > > #lang racket/base > (require racket/place) > > in an installation without distributed places.
This gives the error create-empbedding-executable: expansion mismatch when getting external paths which, while spelled wrong, I think indicates that I did indeed break things. >> > 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? > > It looks like a valid `node' value is an object, and so the object > could have a method that is called instead of passing the object to > `supervise-place-at'. It appears that `supervise-place-at` is almost exactly like the `launch-place` method of `remote-node%`, except for the issue of named vs unnamed places, which I don't fully understand yet. Sam _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev