At Wed, 14 Mar 2018 22:42:33 +0100, "'Paulo Matos' via Racket Users" wrote: > (define bunit@ > (dynamic-require path-to-unit 'my-base-unit@)) > > [...] > define-compound-unit/infer: unknown unit definition > at: bunit@ > in: (define-compound-unit/infer my-compound@ (import) (export > class-sig^) (link bunit@ my-unit@)) > errortrace...: > context...: > > [...] > > I am surprised that it complains about bunit@ even though it was defined > on the dynamic-require line. Why is this? > > I assume it might have to do with the different phases of the compiler > but I am unsure of the details.
Yes, the message "unknown unit definition" is perhaps too terse. A more complete message would be "no information is known statically about a unit that might turn out to be the value of `bunit@`; in particular, the import and export signatures are not statically known". Assuming you do know the expected import and export signatures, you can use `define-unit-binding` to bind `bunit@` and have its implementation be supplied by the `dynamic-require` expression. -- 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 [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
