[racket] serializable structs and portability

In the meantime I figured out that the structures that were defined not in main.rkt file but in another one got serialized properly. So I moved all definitions in a separate file, and now it works.

(running from DrRacket)

((2) 5 (((lib "bibdcc/structs.rkt") . deserialize-info:order-v0) 
((lib "bibdcc/structs.rkt") . deserialize-info:book-v0) 

-- Éric


On Mar 29, 2011, at 1:21 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote:

> Are you starting the program by running "main.rkt" in DrRacket or with
> something like
> 
> racket main.rkt [in the "bibdcc" directory]
> 
> ?
> 
> 
> If so, do you get a different result using
> 
> racket -l bibdcc
> 
> ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> At Tue, 29 Mar 2011 14:16:33 -0400, Eric Tanter wrote:
>> Sorry I still don't get it.
>> 
>> Here's what I've tried:
>> - moved my application files to the user collects directory of my system. 
>> - made the proper dir/subdir structure
>> - use only (require myapp/mod1) kind of requires
>> 
>> (It works ok)
>> 
>> Now if I serialize some structures in a file, they still get absolute path 
>> names.
>> Eg.:
>> ((2) 5 ((#"/Users/etanter/Library/Racket/5.1/collects/bibdcc/main.rkt" . 
>> deserialize-info:order-v0)
>> 
>> I must be missing something. Any idea?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> -- Éric
>> 
>> 
>> On Mar 28, 2011, at 10:33 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
>> 
>>> At Mon, 28 Mar 2011 18:28:02 -0400, Eric Tanter wrote:
>>>> I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "collection-based library". 
>>>> 
>>>> The structs are part of an app I'm building from scratch.
>>>> For now I have a couple of .rkt files, some of which define the structs in 
>>>> question, and I import them in the main module with (require "foo.rkt"), 
>> etc.
>>> 
>>> I mean in a library that you require like
>>> 
>>> (require mystuff/foo)
>>> 
>>> or
>>> 
>>> (require (planet ....))
>>> 
>>> instead of
>>> 
>>> (require "foo.rkt")
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Or a relative-path `require' is ok from some other module in the same
>>> collection, as long as a collection path is used at some point.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Mar 28, 2011, at 5:22 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> At Mon, 28 Mar 2011 17:36:22 -0400, Eric Tanter wrote:
>>>>>> I'm playing with serializable structs and noticed that the absolute path 
>> of 
>>>>>> the source rkt definition is inserted in the representation (I'm writing 
>>>>>> structs out to a file). 
>>>>>> The problem is that if I then move my application to a server for 
>>>> deployment, 
>>>>>> all serialized structs cannot be deserialized anymore. If I edit/replace, 
>>>> it 
>>>>>> works, but I assume this is not the right way to proceed.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> What is the best way to obtain "portable" serialized structs?
>>>>> 
>>>>> If the struct is defined in a collection-based library, then the
>>>>> serialized form will use the collection path instead of a filesystem
>>>>> path. I think that's the only way currently to make the information
>>>>> path-independent.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _________________________________________________
>>>> For list-related administrative tasks:
>>>> http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
>>> 
>