On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 2:51 PM, Zelphir Kaltstahl < zelphirkaltst...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Having to write all things in terms of where things come from like in: > > > '([racket/base +] . [1 2]) > > is not ergonomic at all. > Absolutely! To be clear, I was not suggesting that you use that format in practice: I was trying to illustrate part of the low-level mechanism by which `serial-lambda` (and `racket/serialize` in general) work. Using `serial-lambda` does all of the difficult accounting for you to make sure the right function from the right module is there when you deserialize it and to arrange for the serializable procedure to take its lexical environment along with it. You do have to be sure that you're dealing with pure functions and serializable data structures, but you can use it as a drop-in replacement for `lambda` and get surprisingly far before you have to think about any of the details. -- 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.
