Yesterday, Vincent St-Amour wrote:
At Tue, 31 Jul 2012 07:42:53 -0600, Matthew Flatt wrote:
1. Revert the addition of `compatibility/package' and
`compatibility/mpair', including the documentation changes (but
maybe add back some text to discourage misuse of these libraries).
I think the idea is that compatibility means we are keeping this to
be backwards compatible with unknown code that is using it (or at
least, that's one of the meanings).
Robby
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 6:44 PM, Eli Barzilay e...@barzilay.org wrote:
Yesterday, Vincent St-Amour wrote:
At Tue, 31
20 minutes ago, Robby Findler wrote:
I think the idea is that compatibility means we are keeping this
to be backwards compatible with unknown code that is using it (or
at least, that's one of the meanings).
Sounds like `scheme/nest' should be there too then. But in any case,
what bugs me
I meant literal file copies (or links if that works everywhere). And I think
that would satisfy Matthew too.
_
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
At Mon, 30 Jul 2012 19:45:07 -0400, Vincent St-Amour wrote:
At Mon, 30 Jul 2012 14:52:06 -0600,
Matthew Flatt wrote:
If we really want to have two names for these things --- the
compatibility name and the compatibility name --- then I think we
should at least consolidate to a single
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu wrote:
To start afresh, here are two suggestions, which are mutually
exclusive. The first is my preference:
1. Revert the addition of `compatibility/package' and
`compatibility/mpair', including the documentation changes
At Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:26:56 -0700,
Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu wrote:
To start afresh, here are two suggestions, which are mutually
exclusive. The first is my preference:
1. Revert the addition of
At Tue, 31 Jul 2012 14:08:16 -0400, Vincent St-Amour wrote:
Mutable pair functions are in `racket/base', I didn't touch these and am
not planning to. Mutable list functions, though, I moved. The name is
misleading.
Should `compatibility/mpair' be `compatibility/mlist' (while
`racket/mpair'
At Tue, 31 Jul 2012 13:04:40 -0600,
Matthew Flatt wrote:
At Tue, 31 Jul 2012 14:08:16 -0400, Vincent St-Amour wrote:
Mutable pair functions are in `racket/base', I didn't touch these and am
not planning to. Mutable list functions, though, I moved. The name is
misleading.
Should
At Fri, 20 Jul 2012 16:33:54 -0400, Vincent St-Amour wrote:
How about having a `compatibility' collect, which would include this and
things like `racket/package' (compatibility with Chez) and `racket/mpair'
(compatibility with Scheme)? It would be harder to confuse these things
with blessed
At Mon, 30 Jul 2012 13:10:28 -0600,
Matthew Flatt wrote:
At Fri, 20 Jul 2012 16:33:54 -0400, Vincent St-Amour wrote:
How about having a `compatibility' collect, which would include this and
things like `racket/package' (compatibility with Chez) and `racket/mpair'
(compatibility with
On Jul 30, 2012, at 3:52 PM, Vincent St-Amour wrote:
The main advantage (IMO) of having, say, mutable lists in
`compatibility' is that searching the docs points there instead of to
`racket'. This makes it clear that they are not a blessed Racket
feature. This is (IMO) the main point of the
At Mon, 30 Jul 2012 15:52:52 -0400, Vincent St-Amour wrote:
The main advantage (IMO) of having, say, mutable lists in
`compatibility' is that searching the docs points there instead of to
`racket'. This makes it clear that they are not a blessed Racket
feature. This is (IMO) the main point of
At Mon, 30 Jul 2012 16:00:12 -0400,
Matthias Felleisen wrote:
Having said that, I would like to propose that we COPY
files/subcollections from racket/ to compatibility/ (and keep them in
sync) if we wish to indicate that they are not really rackety.
Assuming you mean keeping the same interface
At Mon, 30 Jul 2012 14:52:06 -0600,
Matthew Flatt wrote:
At Mon, 30 Jul 2012 16:00:12 -0400, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
I fully and enthusiastically agree with this perspective but I don't think
this
is high on our list of things to do.
When we consider such moves, we should always
15 matches
Mail list logo
