On Feb 27, 2013, at 9:07 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
>
> "Cross-phase-persistence-inducing" would be an accurate description,
> but that's a mouthful. Is there a short variant that connects to
> existing terminology better than "phase-collapsing"?
1. cropping [seriously]
2. I would stay away fro
At Wed, 27 Feb 2013 07:53:16 -0500 (EST), "J. Ian Johnson" wrote:
> I should mention that the literature on staged metaprogramming calls this
> "cross-stage persistence," (CSP) so I second Carl's proposal of cross-phase.
All module declarations are cross-phase persistent (unlike module
instantiat
0 (EST)
Subject: Re: [racket-dev] [plt] Push #26372: master branch updated
First of all, thanks very much, Matthew, for implementing this! This looks
like a great feature to me. I have often been frustrated that users' data
structures aren't easy to quote or to manipulate in macros in
First of all, thanks very much, Matthew, for implementing this! This looks
like a great feature to me. I have often been frustrated that users' data
structures aren't easy to quote or to manipulate in macros in the same way
as pairs or vectors; this should go a long way to improving the situation
Greetings.
On 2013 Feb 27, at 01:14, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> I think part of the problem is distinguishing "module declarations"
> (which don't have a phase) from "module instantiations" (which are
> normally phase-specific).
If 'which don't have a phase' is the key phrase, how about:
phase-ne
I think part of the problem is distinguishing "module declarations"
(which don't have a phase) from "module instantiations" (which are
normally phase-specific).
I want an adjective for a declaration that describes a treatment of its
instances. "Phaseless" is bad, because no module declaration has
all-phase modules
static modules
static-phase modules
phase-invariant modules
On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Vincent St-Amour wrote:
> At Tue, 26 Feb 2013 16:59:01 -0500,
> mfl...@racket-lang.org wrote:
> > 899a327 Matthew Flatt 2013-02-26 14:14
> > :
> > | add experimental support for "pha
At Tue, 26 Feb 2013 16:59:01 -0500,
mfl...@racket-lang.org wrote:
> 899a327 Matthew Flatt 2013-02-26 14:14
> :
> | add experimental support for "phaseless" modules
> |
After reading the docs, I find the name "phaseless" confusing. IIUC,
these modules are not special because they have no phase, bu
8 matches
Mail list logo
