No worries. Thank you for the help as always.
On 4/16/21 2:11 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> Yes, attaching a module instances doesn't `require` it anywhere.
>
> (Sorry --- I didn't look at your program closely enough to work out
> whether you meant to require it, start out with a non-empty namespace,
Yes, attaching a module instances doesn't `require` it anywhere.
(Sorry --- I didn't look at your program closely enough to work out
whether you meant to require it, start out with a non-empty namespace,
or something else.)
At Fri, 16 Apr 2021 18:02:47 +, Sage Gerard wrote:
> Yes. The error c
Yes. The error changed to "hello: unbound identifier, also no #%app ..."
for me, so I also had to add `(namespace-require (quote-module-path
restricted) ns)` to get it working.
Were you expecting that I had to do that too? The docs for the
`make-base-*-namespace` procedures make it sound like atta
The name `'restricted` is allowed as a shorthand in `require` because
`require` knows what module it's in. The `namespace-attach-module`
function does not try to infer a module context from the namespace
argument; it uses the namespace argument only for its registry. So, you
need to use the full na
Why does this raise "namespace-attach-module: module not declared (in
the source namespace)"?
I expected that the `restricted` submodule would be both declared and
instantiated by the time control reached `namespace-attach-module`.
(module anon racket/base
(module restricted racket/base
(
5 matches
Mail list logo
