Hello there! When I try this kind of module architecture, I get struct-out: multiple bindings (set-container-elements!, set-container-elements!, ...) for structure-type identifier

Is this a bug in struct-out or am I doing something wrong?

it was working fine until I made elements mutable

@jesus Well first I get an error on the (require 'private) because the foo module is a sibling that can’t see the private module. I’m guessing these modules were originally files like "private.rkt", "foo.rkt" and so on? But assuming they are split into files like that: I can’t explain the behavior you’re seeing. I can say what I would do instead is: ;; private.rkt #lang racket/base (provide (struct-out element) (struct-out container)) (struct element (name value) #:transparent) (struct container element ([elements #:mutable]) #:transparent) ;; foo.rkt -- and likewise for bar.rkt and baz.rkt #lang racket/base (require "private.rkt") (provide (except-out (struct-out foo) foo) (rename-out [-foo foo])) (struct foo container ()) (define (-foo) (foo "Foo" 0 '())) ;; public.rkt #lang racket/base (require "foo.rkt" "bar.rkt" "baz.rkt") (provide (all-from-out "foo.rkt") (all-from-out "bar.rkt") (all-from-out "baz.rkt")) ;; user.rkt #lang racket/base (require "public.rkt") (define my-foo (foo)) (set-container-elements! my-foo (list (bar) (baz))) (displayln my-foo)

TL;DR Instead of using #:name, just define the “special constructor” as a plain function and rename it on provide. Omit the “normal” ctor from the struct-out.

Also I kind of prefer public.rkt this way, because it simply re-provides foo.rkt et al as-is. (In fact it’d be trivial using #lang reprovide.)

But yes. I agree it’s weird if your original way stopped working just because you added #:mutable. If that’s really your question, I have no answer. Someone else hopefully does.

Arg. Maybe I should @ the correct person. @jerome.martin.dev ^