Do you definitely want *only* definitions explicitly provide-ed by the module, or is it acceptable (or even desirable) to see *all* module definitions? If the latter, you could use module->namespace.
On Tuesday, July 21, 2020 at 11:45:38 AM UTC-4, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote: > > How I can combine these three? I want to do something like this: > > (define n (make-base-namespace)) > (define p (build-path f)) > (eval `(require ,p) n) > > Racket doesn't like that: bad syntax for require sub-form because p is a > path-typed value. > > Essentially, I want to inject the module at f into n so that the provided > identifiers of f are visible inside n. (I haven't been able to get > dynamic-require working either, nor is it an entirely satisfactory > solution because I may not always know what names f is providing.) > > Thanks, > Shriram > -- 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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/aa4d274a-3617-42f7-8e5a-666b45f8b227o%40googlegroups.com.
