[racket] does Racket need a global VM ?

From: Noel Welsh (noelwelsh at gmail.com)
Date: Thu Sep 9 04:32:31 EDT 2010

On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Gaspard Bucher <gaspard at teti.ch> wrote:
> I am working on an open source software called Rubyk (real-time signal
> processing for art, http://rubyk.org) which currently supports Lua and other
> specialized DSL scripting.

Looks interesting.

> 1. (ideal solution) Is it possible to have many Racket execution contexts
> (VM) in the same process ?

Perhaps. There are 'places' which are very new -- I haven't yet played
with them. See

  http:[email protected]/msg00580.html

> 2. (global lock solution) If not, is it possible to protect contexts through
> namespaces or other tricks ?

Racket code is written in modules which enforce abstraction
boundaries. Specifically, names are module not globally scoped (unless
you go out of you way to get around this). So that should prevent the
name collision issues you mentioned.

You might be interested in Fluxus:



Posted on the users mailing list.