In the manifesto, I'm a bit surprised by the following: > this philosophy prohibits the idea of “projects,” as found in other IDEs, > because this also externalizes resource management, linking, and other > aspects of program creation.
Couldn't one call package designing a project? Sure, a package can depend on other packages, but that's true for any "project". And when I'm building a package, I'm mostly editing the source files of this package in parallel. You can even tell which files are in the same project *within* a rkt source file, by looking at the `require`s. I'd be happy to have an official automatic generation of the info.rkt with dependencies and doc stubs and other small things related to package design (as as been done by others). I can definitely understand that it's not your priority, but merely dismissing the idea "projects" altogether seems strange. Or maybe I'm misunderstanding the idea here? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
