[racket-users] Re: Can the embedded interpreter load modules not included using ++lib?

[Colin James]

Thank you so much, that solved the issue with requiring local collections.
I'll mark as complete since I kinda went off-topic near the end anyway.
Thanks again.

On Wednesday, May 9, 2018 at 4:12:40 PM UTC+1, Ondřej Majerech wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> after calling scheme_set_collects_path, you also need to call 
> scheme_init_collection_paths 
> (env,
>  
> scheme_null) to initialise the current-library-collection-paths parameter.
>
> On Tuesday, 8 May 2018 20:07:07 UTC+2, Colin James wrote:
>>
>> So, basically, I was wondering how one could go about requiring modules 
>> in /usr/share/racket/collects from the embedded interpreter.
>>
>> My current program links against a base.c file generated with raco ctool 
>> base.c ++lib racket/base and simply runs REPL, it's essentially copied 
>> from the Racket documentation that provides the same example:
>> int interpreter_run(Scheme_Env* env, int argc, char* argv[])
>> {
>> // set default collects path 
>> scheme_set_collects_path(scheme_make_path(
>> "/usr/share/racket/collects"));
>> 
>> // declare racket/base modules
>> declare_modules(env);
>>
>> // require racket/base namespace
>> scheme_namespace_require(scheme_intern_symbol("racket/base"));
>>
>> // require REPL symbols
>> Scheme_Object* symbols[2];
>> symbols[0] = scheme_intern_symbol("racket/base");
>> symbols[1] = scheme_intern_symbol("read-eval-print-loop");
>>
>> // dynamically require function from racket/base
>> Scheme_Object* func = scheme_dynamic_require(2, symbols);
>> 
>> // invoke REPL
>> scheme_apply(func, 0, nullptr);
>> 
>> return EXIT_SUCCESS;
>> }
>>
>> However, I have a few questions about this. Must all modules that one 
>> wants to require be stated when doing the previous raco command (++lib)?
>> I'm not certain about the effect of doing *scheme_set_collects_path* 
>> actually has in relation to how collections are required.
>>
>> For example, from my REPL example:
>>
>>> > $ ./racketeer 
>>>
>>> > (find-system-path 'collects-dir)
>>> #
>>>
>>
>> Evidently it successfully sets the collection path.
>> However, the context trace of attempting to require anything else from 
>> the REPL example seems to completely omit this.
>>
>> Example:
>>
>>> > $ 
>>> ./racketeer
>>> > (require racket/base)
>>> > (require racket/gui)
>>> stdin::32: collection not found
>>>   for module path: racket/gui
>>>   collection: "racket"
>>>   *in collection directories:*
>>>   context...:
>>>show-collection-err
>>>standard-module-name-resolver
>>>/usr/share/racket/collects/racket/private/misc.rkt:88:7
>>> > (find-system-path 'collects-dir)
>>> #
>>>
>>
>> It fails to require racket/gui and doesn't show any collection 
>> directories at all. Is 'collects-dir completely separate from what the 
>> interpreter actually uses to load modules from collections? If so, would I 
>> need to register a proper collections directory prior to scheme_main_setup? 
>> From what I can tell, it can only successfully (require racket/base) 
>> because it was - for lack of accurate terminology - *compiled in* via 
>> raco's ++lib option. Would that be a correct assumption to make? 
>>
>> My overall intention is to be able to do what racket's REPL can do from 
>> command line, given a folder structure like this:
>>
>>> > $ tree 
>>> something   
>>>
>>>
>>> something
>>> ├── compiled
>>> │   ├── main_rkt.dep
>>> │   ├── main_rkt.zo
>>> │   ├── other_rkt.dep
>>> │   └── other_rkt.zo
>>> ├── main.rkt
>>> └── other.rkt
>>>
>>
>> Racket, from command line, ran from that the containing folder, can 
>> (require something):
>>
>> > $ 
>>> racket 
>>> Welcome to Racket v6.12.
>>> > (require something)
>>> > (useless-func)
>>> Useless function
>>
>>
>> Yet, my REPL example can't do this but I suspect there's probably 
>> existent scheme_* functions to do this (I seen one call something like 
>> scheme_set_cmd and people pass argv[0] to it).
>> I just think it'd be useful to be able to dynamically require modules the 
>> embedded interpreter but I can't seem to get it to work at all. I've 
>> dabbled with things like dynamic-require and such, but due to my blatant 
>> lack of understanding of how modules and collections are meant to work, 
>> it's all just fell flat.
>>
>> Any clarification on anything I've posted about would be much appreciated 
>> as I'm currently going around in circles and manually purging files 
>> generated by raco in a futile attempt to understand what's happening. 
>> Out of interest, is it even possible to embed the 

[racket-users] Re: Can the embedded interpreter load modules not included using ++lib?

[Ondřej Majerech]

Hi,

after calling scheme_set_collects_path, you also need to call 
scheme_init_collection_paths 
(env,
 
scheme_null) to initialise the current-library-collection-paths parameter.

On Tuesday, 8 May 2018 20:07:07 UTC+2, Colin James wrote:
>
> So, basically, I was wondering how one could go about requiring modules in 
> /usr/share/racket/collects from the embedded interpreter.
>
> My current program links against a base.c file generated with raco ctool 
> base.c ++lib racket/base and simply runs REPL, it's essentially copied 
> from the Racket documentation that provides the same example:
> int interpreter_run(Scheme_Env* env, int argc, char* argv[])
> {
> // set default collects path 
> scheme_set_collects_path(scheme_make_path("/usr/share/racket/collects"
> ));
> 
> // declare racket/base modules
> declare_modules(env);
>
> // require racket/base namespace
> scheme_namespace_require(scheme_intern_symbol("racket/base"));
>
> // require REPL symbols
> Scheme_Object* symbols[2];
> symbols[0] = scheme_intern_symbol("racket/base");
> symbols[1] = scheme_intern_symbol("read-eval-print-loop");
>
> // dynamically require function from racket/base
> Scheme_Object* func = scheme_dynamic_require(2, symbols);
> 
> // invoke REPL
> scheme_apply(func, 0, nullptr);
> 
> return EXIT_SUCCESS;
> }
>
> However, I have a few questions about this. Must all modules that one 
> wants to require be stated when doing the previous raco command (++lib)?
> I'm not certain about the effect of doing *scheme_set_collects_path* 
> actually has in relation to how collections are required.
>
> For example, from my REPL example:
>
>> > $ ./racketeer   
>>  
>> > (find-system-path 'collects-dir)
>> #
>>
>
> Evidently it successfully sets the collection path.
> However, the context trace of attempting to require anything else from the 
> REPL example seems to completely omit this.
>
> Example:
>
>> > $ 
>> ./racketeer
>> > (require racket/base)
>> > (require racket/gui)
>> stdin::32: collection not found
>>   for module path: racket/gui
>>   collection: "racket"
>>   *in collection directories:*
>>   context...:
>>show-collection-err
>>standard-module-name-resolver
>>/usr/share/racket/collects/racket/private/misc.rkt:88:7
>> > (find-system-path 'collects-dir)
>> #
>>
>
> It fails to require racket/gui and doesn't show any collection directories 
> at all. Is 'collects-dir completely separate from what the interpreter 
> actually uses to load modules from collections? If so, would I need to 
> register a proper collections directory prior to scheme_main_setup? From 
> what I can tell, it can only successfully (require racket/base) because it 
> was - for lack of accurate terminology - *compiled in* via raco's ++lib 
> option. Would that be a correct assumption to make? 
>
> My overall intention is to be able to do what racket's REPL can do from 
> command line, given a folder structure like this:
>
>> > $ tree 
>> something
>>   
>>
>> something
>> ├── compiled
>> │   ├── main_rkt.dep
>> │   ├── main_rkt.zo
>> │   ├── other_rkt.dep
>> │   └── other_rkt.zo
>> ├── main.rkt
>> └── other.rkt
>>
>
> Racket, from command line, ran from that the containing folder, can 
> (require something):
>
> > $ 
>> racket 
>> Welcome to Racket v6.12.
>> > (require something)
>> > (useless-func)
>> Useless function
>
>
> Yet, my REPL example can't do this but I suspect there's probably existent 
> scheme_* functions to do this (I seen one call something like 
> scheme_set_cmd and people pass argv[0] to it).
> I just think it'd be useful to be able to dynamically require modules the 
> embedded interpreter but I can't seem to get it to work at all. I've 
> dabbled with things like dynamic-require and such, but due to my blatant 
> lack of understanding of how modules and collections are meant to work, 
> it's all just fell flat.
>
> Any clarification on anything I've posted about would be much appreciated 
> as I'm currently going around in circles and manually purging files 
> generated by raco in a futile attempt to understand what's happening. 
> Out of interest, is it even possible to embed the Racket interpreter for 
> the purposes of interoperability? I've not seen anyone do it and the 
> documentation for scheme_* functions is sparing, to say the least. It seems 
> to me the only way to achieve interoperability would be to wrap C that 
> utilises native IPC to communicate with the intended application and then 
> load and execute the wrapper.
>
> Sorry