Ok, I thought I had figured this out, but I was wrong. Here's what I want to be able to do:
- take an identifier in a fully-expanded source file - translate that identifier to some symbol in a predictable way - so that other references to that same (free-identifier=?) identifier get translated to the same symbol It's pretty easy to do this in a single module -- just keep a free-id-table of all the identifiers mapping to gensyms. But I want to be able to do this across modules, and across invocations of this program. IOW, when I run my program on one source file, I'd like to get a symbol for a provided definition that's the same symbol I get when I run my program on a different source file containing a reference to that definition. Clearly this is possible, since Racket manages, but is there a way that I can do it? Sam On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 7:55 AM, Matthew Flatt <mfl...@cs.utah.edu> wrote: > Yes, it can be ".2", etc. The numbers are generated as needed to create > distinct names --- deterministically for a given module compilation, > assuming that all macros used by expansion are deterministic. > > At Wed, 16 Jul 2014 07:36:50 -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: >> Does that mean that I can/should just drop the .1 to get the defined name? >> Can it also be .2 etc? >> >> Sam >> On Jul 16, 2014 4:34 AM, "Matthew Flatt" <mfl...@cs.utah.edu> wrote: >> >> > That `posn1.1` is a unreadable symbol that stands for the symbol >> > `posn1` plus some marks that distinguish it. >> > >> > In other words, `posn1.1` bridges (in an ugly way) the symbol-based >> > world of module environments and the identifier-based world of syntax. >> > In the future, I hope to shift module environments to be >> > identifier-based to avoid these unreadable symbols. >> > >> > At Tue, 15 Jul 2014 09:10:26 -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: >> > > If you take this program and fully-expand it in the macro stepper: >> > > >> > > #lang racket >> > > (struct posn (x y)) >> > > (define p1 (posn 1 2)) >> > > >> > > You see that the residual program has an application of the `posn1` >> > > function, which is the hidden constructor. And indeed, the >> > > fully-expanded program has a definition of `posn1`. However, if you >> > > click on the use of `posn1`, the macro stepper will tell you that it's >> > > defined in this module as `posn1.1`, and provided as `posn1.1` as >> > > well. If you write program to grovel through the fully-expanded >> > > syntax, you get these same results as the `src-id` and >> > > `nominal-src-id` from `identifier-binding`. >> > > >> > > Why is this? And is there a way to get from `posn1.1` to `posn1` >> > reliably? >> > > >> > > Sam >> > _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
