Do you definitely want *only* definitions explicitly provide-ed by the module, or is it acceptable (or even desirable) to see *all* module definitions? If the latter, you could use module->namespace.
On Tuesday, July 21, 2020 at 11:45:38 AM UTC-4, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote: > > How I can combine these three? I want to do something like this: > > (define n (make-base-namespace)) > (define p (build-path f)) > (eval `(require ,p) n) > > Racket doesn't like that: bad syntax for require sub-form because p is a > path-typed value. > > Essentially, I want to inject the module at f into n so that the provided > identifiers of f are visible inside n. (I haven't been able to get > dynamic-require working either, nor is it an entirely satisfactory > solution because I may not always know what names f is providing.) > > Thanks, > Shriram > -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/aa4d274a-3617-42f7-8e5a-666b45f8b227o%40googlegroups.com.
