[plt-scheme] plugins?

From: Hugh Myers (hsmyers at gmail.com)
Date: Thu Jul 2 12:14:35 EDT 2009

I would vote yes. Not necessarily for code analysis, but for listing
separately. I was looking for a spell-checker when I ran into
needle-haystack problem. Should think the author could handle the it
is/it isn't problem and so indicate when posting.


On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 9:20 AM, Carl Eastlund<carl.eastlund at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Grant Rettke<grettke at acm.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 6:08 AM, Carl Eastlund<carl.eastlund at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> To add one more example, Dracula (cce / dracula.plt) is a plugin.
>>> There's no way to "distinguish" them because they're not different
>>> things... they're just packages that run different code.  Some
>>> packages may even contain multiple "plugins".  Being able to tell what
>>> code a package runs is not easy.
>> A plugin category might be worthwhile. It communicates the intent
>> better than development tool.
> I spoke too quickly.  It is statically determinable whether a package
> (or any collection in the PLT Scheme sense) contains a plugin.  The
> info.ss files give this information.
> It would be a useful category.  I'm not sure whether it's best left as
> a developer-specified category, though, or an automatically determined
> one.  I don't know that Planet really needs to be running code
> analysis.
> --Carl

Posted on the users mailing list.