From: Eli Barzilay (eli at barzilay.org)
Date: Wed Oct 10 10:26:34 EDT 2012

Just now, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> I guess we should try this, but I think we should keep it specific
> to bytecode loading. That is, I don't think we should try to splice
> a .zip-based filesystem into Racket's core filesystem operations.

That's what I had in mind, though splicing a zip at the lower level
is tempting for an even easier distribution of content...  But it
sounds better to avoid it and instead, when needed, go for the
lowlevel hooks so that any arbitrary code could be plugged in to
access files.


BTW, a cute mini project would be to start with some bindings to FUSE,
then have a single racket process that has code for implementing a FS
and also use it -- so you end up having racket code that implements
the access, and code that uses it.  But I think that there's no
per-process local mounting via fuse...


          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
                    http://barzilay.org/                   Maze is Life!

Posted on the dev mailing list.