On 07/16/2012 12:39 PM, Harry Spier wrote:
I should have been a little clearer with my question. I understand
that its not a good idea to expose the setters and getters of a struct
unnecessarily. What I meant was:
(provide struct-id) exposes the struct constructor
(provide (struct-out struct-i
On 07/16/2012 12:39 PM, Harry Spier wrote:
what use is having
access to the constructor without access to the field getters and
setters.
One possible answer to this is that you can match on a structure with
just its constructor in scope:
;; s.rkt
#lang racket
(provide foo)
(struct foo (bar b
I should have been a little clearer with my question. I understand
that its not a good idea to expose the setters and getters of a struct
unnecessarily. What I meant was:
(provide struct-id) exposes the struct constructor
(provide (struct-out struct-id)) exposes the constructor and the field
get
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 15-07-12 17:40, Harry Spier wrote:
> 1) In section 8 of the Racket reference there is this example:
> --- Examples:
> (define-struct tree (val left right))
>
>> (match (make-tree 0 (make-tree 1 #f #f) #f)
>
Hi,
Section 4 of the Racket reference says this about `define-struct':
""" Like struct, except that the syntax for supplying a super-id is
different, and a constructor-id that has a make- prefix on id is
implicitly supplied via #:extra-constructor-name.
This form is provided for backwards compat
5 matches
Mail list logo
