On 11/29/2011 4:10 PM, Antonio Menezes Leitao wrote:
Is this the correct configuration? What
do you usually do when you need to debug Racket internals (particularly,
mysterx)?
Personally, I debug it in optimized no-symbols no-debugging mode,
because I've had little success any other way. Fortu
Hi,
While trying to build libmysterx using VisualStudio 2010 with
Debug configuration for x64 I got a linker error saying:
fatal error LNK1112: module machine type 'x64' conflicts with target
machine type 'X86'
The error seems related to the fact that the Debug configuration for
subproject myssi
Matthias Felleisen wrote at 11/29/2011 03:43 PM:
On Nov 29, 2011, at 3:41 PM, Norman Gray wrote:
What Neil said _and_ what Shivers said!
Implementing Shivers-style SREs would be a much bigger win than any alternate
pregexp syntax with differently funky backslash rules from everything else.
At Tue, 29 Nov 2011 15:48:32 -0500,
Stephen Bloch wrote:
> Those are probably the only REASONABLE sequences, but novice
> programmers will always find unreasonable ways to do it -- and those
> are the students I'm most worried about.
>
> To reduce the space of possible mistakes, I'm sorta leaning
Normally I only read messages of this list. Now I feel I have to reply. I
have seen various floating point systems. Some of them would immediately
force an abort when forming an overflow or underflow. Others would abort
only after referring to underflowed or overflowed floating point (with
trouble
On 2011-11-29 15:43:27 -0500, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
> So, any volunteers?
>
I added this to the list of intro projects on GitHub, so if anyone
wants to take this up, please put it up on GitHub/PLaneT and
update the page:
https://github.com/plt/racket/wiki/Intro-Projects
Cheers,
Asumu
__
Matthias wrote:
> I see two sequences:
>
> -below ;; disables up to
>
> -above ;; here; disables up to -below and re-enables tests
>
> or
>
> -above ;; disables everything up to here and enables tests up to
>
> -below ;; here; disables tests below.
>
> Anything else? -- Matthias
Thos
On Nov 29, 2011, at 3:41 PM, Norman Gray wrote:
>
> What Neil said _and_ what Shivers said!
>
> Implementing Shivers-style SREs would be a much bigger win than any alternate
> pregexp syntax with differently funky backslash rules from everything else.
So, any volunteers?
_
On 2011 Nov 29, at 18:14, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> 1. Everyone should acknowledge the JWZ quote, "Some people, when
> confronted with a problem, think 'I know, I'll use regular expressions.'
> Now they have two problems." Regular expressions are Perl's hammer that
> makes most problems look lik
I can't answer the question about underflow. But if you don't mind
installing a nightly build of Racket, you get the (currently
undocumented) module `unstable/flonum', which exports these:
flonum->bit-field
bit-field->flonum
flonum->ordinal; number of flonums away from 0 (+ or -
1. Everyone should acknowledge the JWZ quote, "Some people, when
confronted with a problem, think 'I know, I'll use regular expressions.'
Now they have two problems." Regular expressions are Perl's hammer that
makes most problems look like a nail.
2. Before someone spends too much time puttin
I'm currently proctoring the freshmen's lab on inexact numbers and was curious
how to denote subnormal numbers in Racket.
Turns out that's not possible, since there is no underflow. Why does Racket
follow the old standard of representing underflow with inexact zero?
I imagine changing it now woul
> I'm curious what others think so I'll try to find the irc
conversation.
http://racket-lang.org/irc-logs/2026.txt
http://racket-lang.org/irc-logs/2027.txt
http://racket-lang.org/irc-logs/2028.txt
Search for "regexp"
> But my first impression is that such a new #px reader syntax
> s
That would also work.
Robby
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 8:43 AM, Matthias Felleisen
wrote:
>
> I think we're over-complexifying the whole situation.
> Perhaps we should allow only one of these things to
> appear in the definitions buffer. We're talking about
> novice programmers. I don't expect them
I think we're over-complexifying the whole situation.
Perhaps we should allow only one of these things to
appear in the definitions buffer. We're talking about
novice programmers. I don't expect them to use check-expect
after semester 1 (or perhaps part of 2). I just don't think
that this is a
If I put two -above's in a row does that push past the previous -below? :)
In all seriousness, this seems like a way for students to get confused
about what their programs are or aren't doing. It seems easy to lose
track of where the aboves and belows are.
If I understand correctly, this is not
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 12:02:46AM -0800, Pauan wrote:
> JavaScript you can saythis: /\\\d/ But before we can even consider
> such a syntax, we first need to add in theabove mentioned regexp
> syntaxes. Because otherwise #px/\n/ would compile into(pregexp "\\n")
> which would then throw an error,
I see two sequences:
-below ;; disables up to
-above ;; here; disables up to -below and re-enables tests
or
-above ;; disables everything up to here and enables tests up to
-below ;; here; disables tests below.
Anything else? -- Matthias
On Nov 28, 2011, at 10:09 PM, Robby Findler w
You need to set the 'responsible' property using the 'git props'
command that Eli has added for your new collection, probably to
'ntoronto'.
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 1:22 AM, wrote:
>
> 4012373 Neil Toronto 2011-11-28 23:01
> :
> | Started icon reorganization
> |
> | - SVG icon sources
> | - P
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 12:02:46AM -0800, Pauan wrote:
> Yes that is exactly it. The rationale is as ozzloy said: right now you
> needto use something like #px"\\d" to match the string "\\5".
> That's a lot ofbackslashes!
> In other languages that support regexps, there's usually a way of
> spe
20 matches
Mail list logo
