On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 1:42 AM, Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu wrote:
At Thu, 9 May 2013 16:22:54 +0200, Laurent wrote:
I've always wondered why the syntax of keywords implied two elements: the
#:keyword and the identifier.
I find that quite heavy for procedure headers, and most of the
At Thu, 6 Jun 2013 11:35:20 -0600, Jay McCarthy wrote:
On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 9:33 AM, Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu wrote:
Since code in a package can synthesize a module reference dynamically,
any static enforcement would have to be approximate, naturally (e.g.,
checks on all
I am *very* strongly in favor of this -- I'd rather have
single-collection packages than multi-collection packages, if forced
to choose. I'm very glad that you and Laurent have done the work here.
I'd be happy to update all of my packages. Currently, of my 9
packages on pkg.racket-lang.org,
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Greg Hendershott
greghendersh...@gmail.com wrote:
I am *very* strongly in favor of this -- I'd rather have
single-collection packages than multi-collection packages, if forced
to choose. I'm very glad that you and Laurent have done the work here.
I'd be happy
Thank you for the thorough explanation.
Also, I'm having the duh moment I predicted.
A collection may have modules in subdirs and still be just one collection.
The use case for a multi-collection package is when you have
collections A and B that you want to be packaged and installed
together --
I don't think this is the right fix to the issue. A core issue (there
may be more) is that calls to subtype during the dynamic extent of a
call to subtype take the same current-seen list as is the current
state of the outer subtype call. This works well when this is supposed
to be part of the same
6 matches
Mail list logo
