[racket-dev] Constructing an identifier to an unexported binding

This sounds like the right solution to me too.

Robby

On Thursday, May 23, 2013, Matthias Felleisen wrote:

>
> +1
>
>
> On May 23, 2013, at 9:42 AM, Carl Eastlund <cce at ccs.neu.edu <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Matthias Felleisen <
> matthias at ccs.neu.edu <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >
> > On May 23, 2013, at 9:34 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <samth at ccs.neu.edu<javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> >
> > >> 2. Is it possible that we could solve the problem via a
> bootstrapping-only violation of our policy that you can add types to Racket
> w/o modifying existing modules?
> > >
> > > No. We can't specify types inside `racket/base` without making
> `racket/base` depend on Typed Racket.
> >
> >
> > 1. I was proposing a fundamental change to the language, with an eye
> toward Racket 2.
> >
> > 2. I was also proposing an experiment that temporarily creates such a
> dependency and we can then look for a refactoring that breaks the
> dependency again but in a way that supports the proper access to these base
> identifiers.
> >
> > It shouldn't be necessary to specify types inside racket/base; it's only
> necessary to make the identifiers available somehow.  Then TR can do the
> type specification, but without using namespaces.  Protecting the exported
> identifiers from misuse could be done by convention -- naming them
> unsafe-<foo> or exporting them from a submodule named "private" -- or by
> enforcement -- for instance, rather than providing them, instead exporting
> a phase 1 syntax object that contains them with appropriate syntax taints /
> dye packs so that they can be used for free-identifier=? but not put into
> expanded code.
> >
> > --Carl
>
>
> _________________________
>   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/20130523/2f18eee9/attachment.html>