On Sat, 12 Mar 2016 15:51:44 -0600,
Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
> On Mar 12, 2016, at 1:22 PM, Jay McCarthy
> wrote:
>
>
> For my taste, I don't want to run any program on my files to "turn
> them into real Racket".
>
> I think you already are running programs on your Rack
Jay McCarthy wrote on 03/12/2016 01:22 PM:
For my taste, I don't want to run any program on my files to "turn
them into real Racket". So, I would not want to do this as a tool.
Just to be sure I communicated it... The only things I'm doing are
making files `info.rkt` and `.scrbl` be generated,
> On Mar 12, 2016, at 1:22 PM, Jay McCarthy wrote:
>
> For my taste, I don't want to run any program on my files to "turn
> them into real Racket".
I think you already are running programs on your Racket programs to create some
other form of Racket. So the only question is what kind of progr
It might be worth noting that there was a thread on the racket-dev list
a little while back that covered a similar topic about submodules and
search paths:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/racket-dev/8BFT-RBDp9E/Y1xOCyf3nIMJ
> On Mar 12, 2016, at 10:22, Jay McCarthy wrote:
>
> For my taste, I do
For my taste, I don't want to run any program on my files to "turn
them into real Racket". So, I would not want to do this as a tool.
On the other hand, I would like to see us unify submodules and
collections into a single concept and have consistent require path
rules. For instance...
- (require
Any comments on this? These Emacs screenshots show the tentative
"one-source-file package" format that I'd like to use for almost all of
my packages. I'd release a tool so that others can maintain their own
packages in this format, if they want to.
http://www.neilvandyke.org/temporary/one-fi
6 matches
Mail list logo
