I like the design of Jay's sstruct, and I think we should take some of its ideas for Racket's `struct` (or Racket2's).
https://github.com/jeapostrophe/exp/blob/master/sstruct.rkt https://github.com/jeapostrophe/exp/blob/master/sstruct-tests.rkt Vincent At Tue, 29 Jul 2014 16:43:52 -0500, Spencer Florence wrote: > > Woops. I was under the impression that #:auto worked like an optional > argument. Is there any way to do optional constructor arguments with > structs (I don't see one but I can hope...)? > > > On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 4:39 PM, J. Ian Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > From the struct docs: > > constructor-id (which defaults to id), a constructor procedure that takes > > m arguments and returns a new instance of the structure type, where m is > > the number of fields that do not include an #:auto option. > > > > You don't give anything to the constructor for #:auto fields. > > -Ian > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Spencer Florence" <[email protected]> > > To: "racket" <[email protected]> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2014 5:32:46 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern > > Subject: [racket] Shared and structs with #:auto > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > I'm trying to use shared with a structure that has a field with #:auto > > > > If I have some structure like this: > > > > > > (struct test ([a #:auto]) #:transparent #:mutable) > > > > > > > > this works fine: > > > > > > (shared ([b (test)]) b) > > > > > > but this errors: > > > > > > (shared ([b (test 1)]) b) > > > > with "shared: wrong argument count for structure constructor; expected 0, > > found 1 in: (test1 1)" > > > > > > Is this a bug? Is there a work around? > > > > --Spencer > > ____________________ > > Racket Users list: > > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users > > > [1.2 <text/html; UTF-8 (quoted-printable)>] > > [2 <text/plain; us-ascii (7bit)>] > ____________________ > Racket Users list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
