[plt-dev] some Racket proposals & implementation

I'm a complete idealist so I'm willing to change anything if we think
it is better. You'll have to restrain me to be practical and
compatible. =)

Jay

On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Matthew Flatt <mflatt at cs.utah.edu> wrote:
> 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.
>
> _________________________________________________
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-dev
>



-- 
Jay McCarthy <jay at cs.byu.edu>
Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University
http://teammccarthy.org/jay

"The glory of God is Intelligence" - D&C 93