[racket-dev] Things we could move out of the core

Did you consider moving "#lang mzscheme" out as well?

Robby

On Thursday, June 27, 2013, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:

> I've now pushed this set of changes, which pass all the racket tests
> and build the whole system cleanly.  I think the next steps are:
>
> - Robby is going to move mzlib/contract.
> - Matthew is going to modify mzlib/compiler and mzlib/unit200.
> - Ryan is working on shrinking the db collection.
> - I posted about shrinking the `pkg` collection and working toward
> removing parts of the `net` collection.
>
> There are also some parts of some collections that aren't needed. Much
> of `openssl` could go if `pkg` was split. The decompiler and
> demodularizer could potentially be moved out. Perhaps distributed
> places could move.
>
> Other things to would, in my estimation, be much harder, and would
> probably be things that are part of `#lang racket`, like the class or
> unit systems or `match`, or things that are deeply intertwined with
> `raco setup`, like planet.
>
> Sam
>
> On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 6:38 PM, Robby Findler
> <robby at eecs.northwestern.edu <javascript:;>> wrote:
> > I can move mzlib/contract after you get done with other stuff.
> >
> > Robby
> >
> >
> > On Wednesday, June 26, 2013, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 4:32 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <samth at ccs.neu.edu<javascript:;>
> >
> >> wrote:
> >> > While moving some files around between packages, I realized that there
> >> > are a number of things that could be moved out of the core and into
> >> > packages.  Here's a partial list of things that I think are not needed
> >> > at all by the rest of the core:
> >>
> >> I've now done the first step of this work.  You can see the results
> >> here: https://github.com/plt/racket/pull/373
> >>
> >> This works to the degree that the core still compiles.  No other
> >> testing has happened yet -- that's the next step. A number of packages
> >> will need additional dependencies.
> >>
> >> I'd like to get feedback on exactly how this is organized.  In
> >> particular, a bunch of things are now in a `compatibility-lib`
> >> collection:
> >>
> >> * almost all of `mzlib`
> >> * `compatibility/*`
> >> * `racket/mpair` and `racket/mlist`
> >>
> >> There's also the following new packages: `errortrace-lib`,
> >> `errortrace-doc`, `unstable-contract-lib`, `unstable-options-lib`,
> >> `sandbox-lib`, `data-lib`, `rackunit`.
> >>
> >> The `help` collection moved to `scribble/lib`.
> >>
> >> Where there isn't a new documentation package, libraries are mostly
> >> documented in `unstable` or `racket-doc`.
> >>
> >> Things that didn't move:
> >>
> >> * `mzlib/compile`: This is used in one place in the compiler, and
> >> should probably be handled differently.  Matthew, any suggestions?
> >> * `mzlib/unit200`. This is loaded into a new namespace in which code
> >> is evaluated in `setup/unpack`.  I don't understand what is happening
> >> there, and thus won't change it.  It's also still used genuinely in
> >> `file/gzip`.
> >> * `mzlib/contract`. This is different enough from `racket/contract`
> >> that I'd prefer to have someone who knows the contract system better
> >> handle this.  Also, much of the contract system implementation is in
> >> the `mzlib` directory, which seems odd.
> >> * `srfi/13`: used in `net/cookie` in a way that's intertwined with
> >> `srfi/14` and would be hard to remove on its own.
> >> * `srfi/8`: Used in unmodified srfi code that we probably shouldn't
> >> change.
> >> * Other SRFIs -- used in the `db` collection, or depended on by those
> that
> >> are.
> >>
> >> Sam
> >> _________________________
> >>   Racket Developers list:
> >>   http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev/archive/attachments/20130627/8d4aeb7b/attachment-0001.html>