Konrad Hinsen writes: > I have added lots of comments to my minimalistic typed language > implementation, in the hope that future language definers will > be able to pick up from there: > > http://github.com/khinsen/racket-typed-lang
There is still one problem, although I am not convinced that it can be fixed in the language definition. The following code fails because 'foo' is considered an unbound identifier: --- test1.rkt ------------------------------------ #lang racket/base (module example a-typed-lang (displayln (foo 42))) (require 'example) -------------------------------------------------- Strangely enough, as soon as my submodule has two forms it works, e.g. --- test2.rkt ------------------------------------ #lang racket/base (module example a-typed-lang (displayln (foo 42)) (displayln (foo 42))) (require 'example) -------------------------------------------------- The documentation for "module" at http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/module.html?q=module#%28form._%28%28quote._~23~25kernel%29._module%29%29 suggests that single-form modules are handled differently than multi-form modules, which might well explain this phenomenon. However, it doesn't provide any clue to a solution. Apparently, my single form is "partially expanded in a module-begin context. If the expansion leads to #%plain-module-begin, then the body of the #%plain-module-begin is the body of the module." Furthermore: "Finally, if multiple forms are provided, they are wrapped with #%module-begin, as in the case where a single form does not expand to #%plain-module-begin." This suggests that if I want my single-form module to be handled exactly like a multi-form module, my single form must expand to something else than #%plain-module-begin. Fine. But who or what decides what my single form becomes when it is "partially expanded in a module-begin context" ? Konrad. ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
