[racket] What about an Racket Artifacts thread?

From: Galler (lzgaller at optonline.net)
Date: Tue Apr 24 23:36:37 EDT 2012


Let me respond to your argument with a specific question.

Below is some code that sets up fluid-like dynamic variable bindings using Jay's

I haven't put this code up on GitHub (or elsewhere)

(define/contract (make-dyno-bindings ids)
  (-> (listof symbol?) (listof (cons/c symbol? web-cell?)))
  (map (λ (id) (cons id (make-web-cell null))) ids))

(with-continuation-mark 'globals (make-dyno-bindings bindings)
  ((lambda () .....

Variables are scoped both dynamically and by Jay's send/suspend primitive. 

Effectively, this results in per-client, dynamically scoped variables.

Perhaps this is a super-dumb idea, but, if so, its a super-dumb idea that could
only be implemented in Racket.

Where does the code go to get users looking at (and hopefully talking) about the
super-dumb idea?  

As I've written to Robby, I don't think the problem is too many people
implementing bad Scheme using Racket. I think the problem is not enough people
implementing the post-Flatt, Yu, Findler and Felleisen et. al language.


Posted on the users mailing list.