Skip to content

fix typo: “nothing” → “noting” #11

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: source
Choose a base branch
from
Open

fix typo: “nothing” → “noting” #11

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion blog/posts/2017-10-27-a-space-of-their-own-adding-a-type-namespace-to-hackett.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -337,7 +337,7 @@ For the most part, all the machinery behind multiple namespaces is invisible to

To circumvent this restriction, `#lang hackett`’s reader includes a somewhat ad-hoc solution that actually inserts a `require` into users’ programs that unmangles and imports all the types provided by the module. This mostly works, but due to the way Racket’s imports work, it isn’t possible for Racket programmers to import different types with the same names as Hackett core types; the two bindings will conflict, and there is no way for users to hide these implicitly imported bindings. Whether or not this is actually a common problem remains to be seen. If it is rare, it might be sufficient to introduce an ad-hoc mechanism to hide certain type imports, but it might be better to extend Racket in some way to better support this use-case.

That issue aside, multi-namespace Hackett is now working smoothly. It’s worth nothing that I did not have to do *any* special work to help Racket’s tooling, such as DrRacket’s Check Syntax tool, understand the binding structure of Hackett programs. Since other tools, such as racket-mode for Emacs, use the same mechanisms under the hood, Racket programmers’ existing tools will be able to properly locate the distinct definition sites for types and values with the same name, another example of how Racket successfully [internalizes extra-linguistic mechanisms][manifesto-extra-linguistic].
That issue aside, multi-namespace Hackett is now working smoothly. It’s worth noting that I did not have to do *any* special work to help Racket’s tooling, such as DrRacket’s Check Syntax tool, understand the binding structure of Hackett programs. Since other tools, such as racket-mode for Emacs, use the same mechanisms under the hood, Racket programmers’ existing tools will be able to properly locate the distinct definition sites for types and values with the same name, another example of how Racket successfully [internalizes extra-linguistic mechanisms][manifesto-extra-linguistic].

As closing notes, even if the majority of this blog post was gibberish to you, do note that Hackett has come quite a long way in just the past two months, adding much more than just a separate type namespace. I might try and give a more comprehensive update at a later date, but here’s a quick summary of the meaningful changes for those interested:

Expand Down