convore.json/groups/arc-runtime-project/moving-remaining-functions-in-arss-to-acss/messages.json

[{"user_id": 25438, "stars": [], "topic_id": 35396, "date_created": 1305485696.7787211, "message": "ar.ss is left over from a different approach that I tried earlier but didn't work out.  Having some of the functions in a separate runtime module makes it harder to make changes, especially ones that need access to the global namespace.  I'll be moving the remaining runtime functions out of ar.ss into ac.ss, and get rid of ar.ss entirely when that is done.", "group_id": 9739, "id": 1062000}, {"user_id": 25438, "stars": [], "topic_id": 35396, "date_created": 1305486075.5649049, "message": "The next thing I'll be looking at is moving the code in ac.ss which implements the compiler into a \"ac.arc\" file (using a racket or perhaps a simpler \"racket-code\" which only takes a string containing Racket code).  Right now functions defined in ac.ss don't appear in Arc's namespace, which means they can't be used from Arc directly.  This is more speculative though, I'll have to see what works.", "group_id": 9739, "id": 1062042}, {"user_id": 32737, "stars": [], "topic_id": 35396, "date_created": 1305503145.2196519, "message": "As an intermediate approach, you could try defining as much as you can in ac.ss with \"ac-def\" rather than \"define\". That should give you a reasonably good idea of what absolutely needs to be in ac.ss, and what could potentially be moved into Arc.\n\nP.S. On my fork, I already set up a core.arc file, which I was intending to move the compiler into, rather than your suggestion of ac.arc.", "group_id": 9739, "id": 1064487}]