Apparently I was too specific and pragmatic.
Let me try the opposite: Maybe more general than you want. :)
After spending some years with Racket, I've noticed certain things are
very popular targets of extension or customization. One is `define`.
Another is `struct`.
The catch is, these various
>
> p.s. While you "have the hood open", you might also want to do something
> similar for `prop:procedure`?
>
I would agree that it is A solution to this particular problem with this
particular prop. The "passthrough" of some form or other works well and is
always
open to me as the language
Just spitballing here, trying to start with "what's the simplest
possible thing that could work?":
You could let the user flag a field as the event. I don't know your
surface syntax, but maybe using an `#:as-evt` keyword would be OK?
You could link/refer the user to the `prop:evt` docs, or,
This would probably sound like rambling but that's only because I am
struggling a
little bit. I implemented a little language that offers its own compound
data
type: first class and users can extend it in various ways. Naturally, it is
implemented as a Racket struct. As I started using the
4 matches
Mail list logo
