[racket] Understanding raco make and its correctness guarantees

Or use DrRacket and turn on the auto compilation feature. Or set up
compiler/cm yourself to do that.

Robby


On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Eric Dobson <eric.n.dobson at gmail.com>wrote:

> That doesn't explain why I can get the same behavior as the macro with
> a function call, probably inlining is responsible for that though.
>
> So the take away is that if I want my running system to represent the
> current state of the source files I either need to run raco make every
> single time, or never run raco make. That seems very counter
> intuitive.
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 1:51 AM, Tobias Hammer <tobias.hammer at dlr.de>
> wrote:
> > The difference lies in the method how racket and raco make check for
> > changes.
> > - racket only looks at each individual file's timestamp source and .zo
> > timestamp and uses whichever is never.
> > - raco make always checks if the file has changed or any of its
> dependencies
> > has changed to decide if it has to recompile the file.
> >
> > Whats happens in version 1 is that the macro is already expanded in a.zo
> and
> > a.zo is still never than a.rkt. Therefore racket loads a.zo (but b.rkt)
> and
> > prints 'version1.
> > In version 2 raco make (or more correctly compiler/cm) checks a.rkt,
> finds
> > the dependency to b.rkt, notices the change in b.rkt (by calculating a
> > checksum over the whole dependency tree if i remember correct) and
> therefore
> > recompiles a.rkt AND b.rkt.
> >
> > Version 3 should as far as i understand never differ, assumed raco make
> > works.
> >
> > Tobias
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 21 Mar 2013 06:23:24 +0100, Eric Dobson <eric.n.dobson at gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I'm trying to understand what are the guarantees that raco make is
> >> meant to provide. I'm going to limit this to simple programs, no fancy
> >> dynamic requires, or trying to trick the compiler.
> >>
> >> In the following scenario:
> >> 1. Edit files
> >> 2. run 'raco make <files>'
> >> 3. Change files
> >> I expect all of these to have the same effect during the running of
> >> phase 0 when running racket.
> >> 4. racket <main-file>
> >> or
> >> 4. raco make <files>
> >> 5. racket <main-file>
> >> or
> >> 4. rm -rf compiled/
> >> 5. raco make <files>
> >> 6. racket <main-file>
> >>
> >> I can make version 1 and 2 differ with the following program:
> >> a.rkt
> >> #lang racket
> >> (require "b.rkt")
> >> (macro)
> >>
> >> #lang racket
> >> (provide maco)
> >> (define-syntax (macro stx)
> >>   #''version1)
> >>
> >> Where the edit is changing version1 to version2. I can also replicate
> >> this with a function and not a macro.
> >>
> >> I thought I could make version 2 and version 3 differ, but cannot seem
> >> to replicate it now, but it would be helpful to know if I see
> >> something that is fixed by clearing the compiled directories.
> >>
> >> My understanding was that racket used the same logic as raco make on
> >> whether or not to use the compiled versions versus recompiling, and
> >> this seems to refute that. Can someone give some insight on what I
> >> should be expecting?
> >> ____________________
> >>   Racket Users list:
> >>   http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > ---------------------------------------------------------
> > Tobias Hammer
> > DLR / Robotics and Mechatronics Center (RMC)
> > Muenchner Str. 20, D-82234 Wessling
> > Tel.: 08153/28-1487
> > Mail: tobias.hammer at dlr.de
> ____________________
>   Racket Users list:
>   http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20130321/35b1aff9/attachment-0001.html>