It is a different way of thinking about protection, one that is more
in line with the way such protections usually happen in Racket.
In a language like Java, the class and the package a class is in both
play a role in determining who has access to what, which is why things
like 'protected' make se
We use this via modules not via lets, which makes it
syntactically simpler. -- Matthias
On May 11, 2011, at 9:35 PM, Mark Engelberg wrote:
> I played around briefly with define-local-member-name but it seemed
> like a rather awkward way to achieve "protected"-ness. From the
> example in the
I played around briefly with define-local-member-name but it seemed
like a rather awkward way to achieve "protected"-ness. From the
example in the help desk, it seems like the classes need to have some
sort of let wrapped around them to share a non-public method between
them. It seems like to set
Did you find define-local-member-name?
Robby
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Mark Engelberg
wrote:
> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 1:10 PM, David Van Horn wrote:
>> Here are some struct definitions and a function, based on Land of Lisp:
>>
>> (struct monster (id [hit #:mutable]) #:transparent)
>> (s
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 1:10 PM, David Van Horn wrote:
> Here are some struct definitions and a function, based on Land of Lisp:
>
> (struct monster (id [hit #:mutable]) #:transparent)
> (struct orc monster (club) #:transparent)
> (struct hydra monster () #:transparent)
> (struct slime monster (sl
Ya, vanilla structs can't do that.
It is possible for there to be no syntactic connection between a
parent's definition (and uses of it) and an arbitrary child
definition, so we can't even use gross expand phase state to
communicate.
I'm a big believer in prototype object systems as a foundation
On 5/11/11 4:03 PM, Nadeem Abdul Hamid wrote:
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 3:45 PM, David Van Horn wrote:
Is there a good way to do a functional struct updates with subtypes of a
structure?
There was some discussion about it a while ago in reference to
struct-copy. The documentation has been updat
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 3:45 PM, David Van Horn wrote:
> Is there a good way to do a functional struct updates with subtypes of a
> structure?
There was some discussion about it a while ago in reference to
struct-copy. The documentation has been updated with some useful
examples, including usage
I think this has come up in the past, but I couldn't find anything.
Is there a good way to do a functional struct updates with subtypes of a
structure?
_
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
9 matches
Mail list logo
