On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 8:21 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <sa...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 10:28 PM, Robby Findler > <ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote: >> On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 8:55 PM, Eli Barzilay <e...@barzilay.org> wrote: >>> A few minutes ago, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: >>>> On Oct 5, 2012 9:16 PM, "Eli Barzilay" <e...@barzilay.org> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > 10 minutes ago, Robby Findler wrote: >>>> > > Oh, right. Duh. >>>> > > >>>> > > And even better, IMO, if it were futures-visualizer/typed/* were >>>> > > a place you could put this information. >>>> > >>>> > Yeah -- that would make distribution much easier, since it will be >>>> > another global convention, like `tests' and `scribblings'. >>>> >>>> I would like to keep things in the `typed' collection. This >>>> maintains the symmetry with `typed/racket. The other conventions >>>> like 'tests' are not externally visible. >>> >>> Yes, the required name would change -- but it's still much saner in >>> terms of authorship & maintenance than me having to keep a file in >>> your collection. >> >> I agree with this and I think earlier emails suggested that Sam >> doesn't trust others to write types for their libraries. > > I'm really sorry if I've given that impression, because I don't think > that at all. The typed interface for the futures visualizer that I > wrote at the beginning of this thread is just a plain Typed Racket > program, and James or you or anyone else could write it easily. This > ought to be the case for any of the typed wrappers in the `typed/*` > collections. > > For code that lives in the `typed-racket/base-env` directory, which is > trusted by TR, I'd want to look at modifications people make, and the > language there is internal and undocumented, so it might be harder for > other people to use, but I still trust people to write types for their > code.
Thanks! I'm very glad I got this wrong! >> Also, Sam: can you explain what "externally visible" means in this context? > > Just that we don't typically require `redex/tests` or > `drracket/scribblings` into other modules written outside of those > collections, whereas for `typed/file`, for example, the whole point is > to be used outside of the `typed` collection. If it was drracket/scribblings/ and not scribblings/drracket, then I would expect the index generation and top-level documentation building to find that, which would be that kind of a require. Also, another precedent from the info.rkt files: drracket tools are found by DrRacket by grovelling around in other collections. It seems like we could have said that x/drracket-tool/main.rkt or something like that is the standard entry point into DrRacket tools, instead of using something specified by the info.rkt file. Even though the mechanism is different, I think the goal was the same: let these things be specified outside the drracket collection, but use them in drracket. Robby _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
