On 04/03/2014 12:42 PM, Roman Klochkov wrote:
Thank you! Now I understand how to do it right.
> but then the
code it produces (the definition) changes the binding of ID
Then why code without (module+ ..) works fine? Even in REPL all is fine.
The short answer is that it sometimes worked by accident.
Here's another example, though, that shows that the original problem
wasn't limited to just module+:
(save-and-define lambda)
(load lambda) ;; => 'different
That produces 'different in the module (without the module+) or at the REPL.
It's essentially like mutating a key held by a hash table. Sometimes you
get lucky, but you can't rely on it. The long answer depends on the
details of the hash function. (For example, the example above depends on
the fact that lambda was originally defined under a different name.)
Ryan
____________________
Racket Users list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
