On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> I see. The errors are about the modules that require "evaluator.rkt".
> That is, the modules that use `phase1-phase0-eval` need to be
> available, not just "evaluator.rkt", so that transformer bindings in
> those modules can be used.
>
> So,
I see. The errors are about the modules that require "evaluator.rkt".
That is, the modules that use `phase1-phase0-eval` need to be
available, not just "evaluator.rkt", so that transformer bindings in
those modules can be used.
So,
(define (prep! varref)
(define p (variable-reference->resolve
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt
wrote:
> Great, thanks!
Also, can you say more about when this trick is needed? When I try to
use it in the actual code that I want to run, I end up with the same
error, or about other submodules that are missing.
More specifically, I added `p
No, the `evaluator` module wasn't available anywhere.
I'll work on the definition of "available" in the docs. "Available at
phase 0" implies that you can use macros that are bound at phase 0 and
whose implementations live at phase 1.
At Wed, 7 May 2014 10:03:25 -0500, Robby Findler wrote:
> Oh! S
Adding an option to `namespace-anchor->empty-namespace` makes sense.
I'm not sure that it should be the default behavior, and so I lean
toward keeping the default behavior the same as it is.
At Wed, 7 May 2014 11:07:32 -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> Great, thanks!
>
> Is there a reason that
Great, thanks!
Is there a reason that this shouldn't be part of the behavior of
`namespace-anchor->empty-namespace`?
Sam
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> I think the right change might be
>
> (module evaluator racket
>
>(define (prep!)
> (parameterize ([
Oh! So the evaluator module is available in phase 0 in 'ns', but not
in 'namespace'. Is that right?
Robby
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> I think the right change might be
>
> (module evaluator racket
>
>(define (prep!)
> (parameterize ([current-namespace
I think the right change might be
(module evaluator racket
(define (prep!)
(parameterize ([current-namespace namespace])
(dynamic-require (variable-reference->module-path-index
(#%variable-reference))
0)))
(define-
Yes, I've read those docs many times. :)
I'll also note that changing the require in 'f' to this doesn't help,
which seems suspicious:
(require (submod ".." evaluator)
(for-meta 0 (submod ".." evaluator))
(for-meta 1 (submod ".." evaluator))
(for-meta 2 (submod
Well, to quote from the docs for `dynamic-require`:
"When provided is a symbol, the value of the module’s export with the
given name is returned, and still the module is not visited or made
available in higher phases."
That's why I think the extra line is needed.
You're right that the error mess
When I look at this code I can't figure out why (submod "weird.rkt"
evaluator) _isn't_ available at phase 0! Could this be a bug?
Robby
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt
wrote:
> This program: https://gist.github.com/samth/e7b55fcef66da9b8416a works
> when line 33 is uncommente
This program: https://gist.github.com/samth/e7b55fcef66da9b8416a works
when line 33 is uncommented, otherwise it gives the error:
?: module mismatch;
attempted to use a module that is not available
possible cause:
using (dynamic-require #f)
but need (dynamic-require 0)
module:
2014-05-06 23:48 GMT+02:00 Stephen Chang :
>> How about an extra button, a "Run Benchmark" button?
>
> You can already get this with the "benchmark" package, from pkg.racket-lang.
A builtin button will hopefully make it obvious even for non-DrRacket
users, that Run is not intended for benchmarks.
13 matches
Mail list logo
