[racket-dev] [plt] Push #24958: master branch updated

If you mean that a connection to the runtime system implies being in
the "racket" collection, I'd say that isn't necessarily so. (The "ffi"
collection relies on a connection to the run-time system, for example.)
So, it would make sense to me to move that to "future-visualizer", too.

I can also see how you might want to keep the trace support available
separate from the visualizer, in which case `racket/future/trace' seems
better than merging it into `racket/future'. But I still think that
`future-visualizer/trace' is better for now, and it could be moved back
out if there's ever actually another consumer of the library.

At Wed, 11 Jul 2012 07:57:20 -0500, Robby Findler wrote:
> There are two pieces to the visualizer: one part extracts traces from
> a computation and the other part shows them. The trace-extraction part
> requires a connection to the runtime system and is, I believe,
> currently in racket/future/trace. Should that be moved into
> racket/future, or kept as a separate piece in racket/future/trace? (Or
> something else?)
> 
> Robby