7 hours ago, Robby Findler wrote:
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 6:56 PM, Eli Barzilay e...@barzilay.org wrote:
But this is very different from what the online check syntax is
doing, and the current problem of letting the output go to the
console still needs to be solved. (And IMO, it should be
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Matthias Felleisen
matth...@ccs.neu.edu wrote:
On Oct 20, 2011, at 8:21 AM, Robby Findler wrote:
I also believe that we don't support these programs well as it is.
I didn't program with closures until I experienced them in Scheme 84 in 1984.
Perhaps people
I've certainly wanted this in the past. Ryan came up with some tricks that
made it easier, but I think a separate REPL that basically ran
(begin-for-syntax (print e)) would be a very nice addition.
I'm also with Eli in thinking that this should be separate from online check
syntax, unless we
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 8:25 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt sa...@ccs.neu.edu wrote:
I've certainly wanted this in the past. Ryan came up with some tricks that
made it easier, but I think a separate REPL that basically ran
(begin-for-syntax (print e)) would be a very nice addition.
I'm also with
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 9:29 AM, Robby Findler
ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu wrote:
On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 8:25 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt sa...@ccs.neu.edu
wrote:
I've certainly wanted this in the past. Ryan came up with some tricks that
made it easier, but I think a separate REPL that
I am running the silly program below (no meaning), and on occasion I see the
output of the *** line in the console from where I launched drracket. 5.2.0.1
from 10/16
#lang racket
(require (for-syntax syntax/parse))
(define-for-syntax (postfix stx word stem)
(datum-syntax stx
Probably when you were running check syntax? (Or maybe when it was
being run for you?)
Robby
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Matthias Felleisen
matth...@ccs.neu.edu wrote:
I am running the silly program below (no meaning), and on occasion I see the
output of the *** line in the console from
Yeap, I have live CS running all the time. Interesting effect.
On Oct 19, 2011, at 5:02 PM, Robby Findler wrote:
Probably when you were running check syntax? (Or maybe when it was
being run for you?)
Robby
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Matthias Felleisen
matth...@ccs.neu.edu
Well, when you do IO at compile time there isn't really a good place
to put it (at least not at the moment) so instead of making a good
place to put it, I just let it go to drracket's stdout. Probably
reasonable to consider this a bug.
Robby
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 4:06 PM, Matthias Felleisen
May I propose a compile-time interaction window in drracket? -- Matthias
On Oct 19, 2011, at 5:08 PM, Robby Findler wrote:
Well, when you do IO at compile time there isn't really a good place
to put it (at least not at the moment) so instead of making a good
place to put it, I just let it
The first step would be a compile-time IO console.
The second step would be a compile-time interaction mode.
This would fit right in with Ryan's past work. It would mean
compile the Def Window (as in CS) and make for-syntax values
available at the repl for experimentation. Then again, I might
That sounds cool to me. Now that I think about it, I think we used to
have something like this (it was a mixin tied to a specific language,
not something that worked for all #lang languages) but it was back
before we had the macro system to support it, I think.
I imagine it would work as by
On Oct 19, 2011, at 5:30 PM, Robby Findler wrote:
That sounds cool to me. Now that I think about it, I think we used to
have something like this (it was a mixin tied to a specific language,
not something that worked for all #lang languages) but it was back
before we had the macro system to
An hour and a half ago, Robby Findler wrote:
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Matthias Felleisen
matth...@ccs.neu.edu wrote:
On Oct 19, 2011, at 5:30 PM, Robby Findler wrote:
I imagine it would work as by having an alternative to run that
would just put you somehow into level 1.
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 6:56 PM, Eli Barzilay e...@barzilay.org wrote:
An hour and a half ago, Robby Findler wrote:
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Matthias Felleisen
matth...@ccs.neu.edu wrote:
On Oct 19, 2011, at 5:30 PM, Robby Findler wrote:
I imagine it would work as by having an
15 matches
Mail list logo
