[racket] Making animations in racket (or, why racket is hard to transition to from scratch)

From: Yaron Minsky (yminsky at gmail.com)
Date: Sat Feb 5 15:34:21 EST 2011

On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 7:20 AM, Stephen Bloch <sbloch at adelphi.edu> wrote:

> > Another thing I'd be interested in suggestions with is how to deal with
> updating a struct in a clean way.  Right now, you need to explicitly wrote
> set-world-X functions for each field in your struct, which is pretty ugly.
>  Also, the fact that structs don't have field names makes them more error
> prone.  None of this is well suited towards building complex worlds with
> lots of components.
> I'm not sure what you mean by "structs don't have field names", but the
> issue of updating individual fields of a struct is under discussion; in a
> version Fairly Soon the student languages will probably have functions that
> produce a copy of a given struct with a single field replaced.
Sorry, I was unclear.  What I meant to say is that struct constructors don't
use field names.  My sense is that this makes dealing with large complex
structs error prone.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20110205/cb53784f/attachment.html>

Posted on the users mailing list.