> The language is composed of 5 forms - help, flag, constraint, program, > and run. With these 5 forms, you get all of the functionality of the > built-in parse-command-line form, and with syntax that's much simpler. In > fact, the nontrivial forms of the language simply use Racket's normal > function definition syntax, so there's very little to learn -- you > basically write normal functions and they are implicitly wired to accept > their inputs via the command line. >
Could we add require? I can think of two compelling reasons: 1. What else is available in the program form? All of racket, or just racket/base? And either way, what if I want to use procedures from other packages? 2. What if I want to write a bunch of library code, and expose some of it in a CLI script? I do this now in different ways: a module+ main that uses code defined in the enclosing module, or a script that requires auxiliary modules. Often the "body" of the program form isn't more than a call to a "main" procedure: this enables me to provide that procedure as part of the library, too. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/a0a0ffba-b8a5-4b57-8fc1-b24a821de85cn%40googlegroups.com.
