Thanks, I'll try that. However, I still think there might be a bug in
racket/enter.rkt. Currently lines 10-11 look like this:
[(enter! mod flag ...) (andmap keyword? (syntax->datum #'(flag ...)))
#'(do-enter! 'mod '(flag ...))]
But when I remove the quoting from mod in line 11, like so …
[(enter! mod flag ...) (andmap keyword? (syntax->datum #'(flag ...)))
#'(do-enter! mod '(flag ...))]
Then (enter! module-name-variable) works as hoped, and (enter!
"module-name-string.rkt") still works too.
Making it work proves nothing ;) I will file a bug report.
Matthew Butterick
On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 7:17 PM, Matthew Flatt <mfl...@cs.utah.edu> wrote:
> I think you probably want to create a new namespace for each
> instantiation of the Scribble module, and attach Scribble (or whatever
> modules you want to stay the same across runs) to the namespace before
> `dynamic-require'ing the module in the new namespace:
>
> #lang racket/base
> (require scribble/base)
>
> (define (re-run module-path)
> (define ns (make-base-namespace))
> (namespace-attach-module (current-namespace) 'scribble/base)
> (parameterize ([current-namespace ns])
> (dynamic-require module-path #f)))
>
>
> At Sat, 27 Apr 2013 19:08:53 -0700, Matthew Butterick wrote:
> > OK, so the proposed solution failed once I tried to pass in the module
> name
> > as a variable. Even though enter! claims to take a module-path as an
> > argument, this will not work:
> >
> > (define name "module.rkt")
> > (module-path? name) ; reports #t
> > (enter! name) ; error: collection "name" not found
> >
> > enter! is treating "name" as a module path instead of resolving it as a
> > defined term. What I can't tell is whether this is mandatory behavior for
> > enter!, or if it's a bug in the enter! macro. (I did look at enter.rkt,
> but
> > this week, it's over my head.)
> >
> > Matthew Butterick
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 6:16 PM, Matthew Butterick
> > <mb.list.a...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> > > Aha, combining enter! with dynamic-require seems to do the trick:
> > >
> > > (define (route req)
> > > (enter! "module.rkt")
> > > (define foo (dynamic-require "module.rkt" 'foo))
> > > (response/xexpr `(p ,(format "~a" foo))))
> > >
> > > Once this route is running in the web server, I can make changes to
> > > module.rkt, then click reload in the browser, and the changes will
> appear
> > > in the browser.
> > >
> > > If this is a terrible idea let me know, otherwise I'll consider this
> > > solved.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 9:56 AM, Matthew Butterick <
> mb.list.a...@gmail.com
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I'm building a website using Scribble as the source format. As a
> > >> development tool, I've built a web server in Python that lets me view
> all
> > >> my Scribble source files and look at them in different states of
> > >> processing. To view the results of the Scribble files, the Python
> server
> > >> just sends the files to Racket via a system command (os.Popen) and
> reads
> > >> the result. This works but it's slow, because it has to launch a new
> > >> Racket thread for every request.
> > >>
> > >> I thought I could speed things up by rewriting the development web
> server
> > >> in Racket. But having tried a few approaches, I'm not sure how to
> duplicate
> > >> this functionality within a Racket web servlet:
> > >>
> > >> *(require <modulename>) *
> > >> This only gets evaluated once, when the server is started. That
> doesn't
> > >> help, since the <filename> is going to be passed in as a parameter
> while
> > >> the server is running.
> > >>
> > >> *(dynamic-require <** modulename **>) *
> > >> This gets evaluated only when invoked, and thus can take <modulename>
> as
> > >> a parameter, but then <filename> can't be reloaded (this is
> essential, as
> > >> the point of the system is to be able to edit the files and see the
> changes
> > >> in the web browser immediately)
> > >>
> > >> *(enter! <modulename>)*
> > >> This reloads the file, but it's not clear how to get access to names
> > >> provided by <modulename>. (The documentation for enter! suggests that
> this
> > >> is not how it's meant to be used anyhow.)
> > >>
> > >> Obviously, I could call a new instance of Racket as a system command,
> but
> > >> that wouldn't offer any advantage over the current approach.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I suppose what I'm looking for is an equivalent of the Python
> > >> reload(<modulename>) command.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Matthew Butterick
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > ____________________
> > Racket Users list:
> > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
>
____________________
Racket Users list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
