Actually what does it mean to access syntactic extensions at run-time?
On Feb 1, 2013, at 2:57 AM, Dan Grossman wrote: > > Cody and I would love an answer to this question from 1.5 months ago if > anybody can point us in the right direction and/or ask us to clarify the > question. Or if the answer is "that is not possible" then we'll do something > else. > > Much thanks! > > --Dan > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 9:20 PM, Cody Schroeder <codeblac...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm in a position that I would like to use dynamic-require to gain access > to all of the provides in a module. This is quite straightforward for normal > procedures, but I also want this to include syntax. However, I get this > error when trying to dynamically require the blah macro from my test module: > > (dynamic-require "test.rkt" 'blah) > blah: use does not match pattern: (blah body) in: blah > > From the spec, it says that "If the module exports provided as syntax, then > a use of the binding is expanded and evaluated in a fresh namespace to which > the module is attached" when using dynamic-require. I don't understand how > it's being used, though. > > Is there a way to use dynamic-require how I want? Is there a better way? > > Cody > > ____________________ > Racket Users list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users > > > ____________________ > Racket Users list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
