[racket] A question about code-style (and memory usage)

Robby Findler wrote at 07/26/2011 03:12 PM:
> If we instead had (require racket/set/aliases), then I could use
> non-ASCII stuff without the big footprint.
>   

Oh, I understand now.  Yes, "<module>/aliases" modules seem reasonable 
to me, if there is some good reason that the aliases can't just be 
defined in the respective "<module>".

If do a "(require racket/set)", I really don't mind if the standard set 
symbols are also included as aliases in the module, so long as there are 
corresponding 7-bit ASCII names that I can use instead.  I'd think 
they'd take up relatively negligible resources, and they're not likely 
to collide with any other uses for the symbols.  In the rare situation 
they do collide, one can do a renaming import or selective import.

-- 
http://www.neilvandyke.org/