[racket] Functional struct update with subtypes

We use this via modules not via lets, which makes it 
syntactically simpler. -- Matthias



On May 11, 2011, at 9:35 PM, Mark Engelberg wrote:

> I played around briefly with define-local-member-name but it seemed
> like a rather awkward way to achieve "protected"-ness.  From the
> example in the help desk, it seems like the classes need to have some
> sort of let wrapped around them to share a non-public method between
> them.  It seems like to set things up so that each class shares fields
> and methods with subclasses but no outsiders would be quite unwieldy
> with many levels of wrapping and scopes that match the inheritance
> hierarchy, which would be hard to read and hard to keep track of.  Is
> it cleaner than I realize to achieve this?
> _________________________________________________
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users