On Fri, 2011-01-14 at 09:07 +0100, gabor papp wrote: > hi Kassen, > > > I don't like the conversion up&down between "path" and "string". > first i didn't like that path and string are different types in racket > either. it differs from other languages, but it's quite logical. one > possible solution would be that our loading routines would take paths > and strings as well, just like the racket path functions. if > load-texture takes path arguments, we would not need the string->path > conversion, and we could simply use build-path instead of the > string-append, path->string combination. what do you think?
Yep I think this is the way to do it. A path type makes sense as it can deal with cross platform differences. The use of strings comes from the time when fluxus was using guile rather than plt/racket. cheers, dave
