[plt-dev] some Racket proposals & implementation

At Sat, 3 Apr 2010 18:16:47 -0400, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
> Guys, when Matthew was here we discussed the balance of changes and name 
> changes, and I think all of us agreed that some change is good but easy 
> migration must be the overriding goal. Keep this in mind please

Yes.

I like

 (define-struct (a x y) #:super b)

much better than the current

 (define-struct (a b) (x y))

but I'm not sure that it's worth changing.

Dropping `make-' from the constructor's name probably creates a bigger
migration problem. Furthermore, that problem may subsume the problems
created by this additional change (i.e., the simple fix of importing
the old `define-struct' solves both sets of problems). So, if the
revised syntax seems significantly better to everyone, then maybe it
would be ok.