> On Oct 17, 2017, at 11:02 PM, Alexis King <lexi.lam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>    It’s obvious that <expr> should be in the value namespace and
>     <type> should be in the type namespace. When expanding code, this
>     makes things easy, but Scribble doesn’t expand its code examples,
>     it merely looks at the lexical information of the source syntax.
>     If a `Tuple` type has a data constructor that is also named
>     `Tuple`, there is no way for Scribble to know which binding to use.


In HtDP/2e, I need different references to the same identifier in one 
paragraph. 
Here is the fully spelled out mechanism: 

> @(module racket-ormap racket/base 
>    (provide racket-ormap)
>    (require (for-label racket) (only-in scribble/manual racket))
>    (define (racket-ormap) @racket[ormap]))
> 
> @(module isl-ormap racket/base
>    (provide isl-ormap)
>    (require (for-label lang/htdp-intermediate) (only-in scribble/manual 
> racket))
>    (define (isl-ormap) @racket[ormap]))
> 
> @(require (submod "." racket-ormap) (submod "." isl-ormap))

Wouldn’t something like this work for Hackett? 

I understand that Type might just be defined in the preceding 
evaluator example. But that’s a different issue, namely, that 
we often need to accumulate the definitions across several different 
example and interaction items. If you combined those two issues with 
something like the above trick, would you be able to get the bindings
done properly? 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to