I'll work backwards...
You want to write:
(pt.x)
Amirite?
Yes, that makes sense, for example: (display pt.x)
I was trying to make the selectors appear more obviously related to a struct
rather than just another variable name (I realise the current convention
used helps a great deal with that). But now I realise that I really would
like to just access the struct attribute directly. Hmmm, I realise I have
been pummelled with non-functional code (not non-functioning code!) for many
years, and maybe it doesn't make sense in the context of racket to use this
type of dot notation and the more verbose selector is probably much more
consistent with the language.
Thanks again. I'll try refraining from making too many trivial posts (well -
I'll try).
----- Original Message -----
From: "Noel Welsh" <noelwe...@gmail.com>
To: "Brad Long" <b...@longbrothers.net>
Cc: <users@racket-lang.org>
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 12:51 AM
Subject: Re: [racket] Redefining selectors - another newbie question
This is fairly easy, but do you really want to avoid typing '-'? I
think what you want is this:
Given:
(struct point (x y))
(define pt (point 1 2))
Currently, you write:
(point-x pt)
You want to write:
(pt.x)
Amirite?
N.
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Brad Long <b...@longbrothers.net> wrote:
Thankyou racket gurus for your advice. My program using a "loop" now
works:
(for-each (fn(x)(display x)(newline)) (.. 10 1)) (display "blastoff!")
--
I have another question, is it possible (preferably easy) to use dot
notation for the auto-generated selectors (e.g. for (point x y z),
instead
of point-x can we use point.x)? I am not exactly sure how to redefine
that
since it is auto-created on construction of the struct.
I have just donned my flame-proof clothing.
Thanks.
_________________________________________________
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
