The 'case-check' branch of my github fork now implements Robby's
suggestion. [https://github.com/97jaz/racket/tree/case-check]
I ran the full build (including documentation), ran
collects/tests/run-automated-tests.rkt, and started up and played
around with DrRacket. The only logged messages were
I think we should change 'case'.
I think we should also add a clear note to the documentation for case
saying this is not the same as 'case' in Scheme because it uses equal?,
not eqv? and giving a few examples to show the difference to head off any
confusion.
Robby
On Monday, November 26, 2012,
Is anyone else seeing strange behavior in DrRacket since this latest round
of DrRacket-related commits? Here's what I'm seeing:
-With definitions/interactions side by side, sometimes the vertical scroll
bar in the interactions window disappears for no reason.
-Saving a file can sometimes render
+1
On Nov 26, 2012, at 11:06 AM, Robby Findler wrote:
I think we should change 'case'.
I think we should also add a clear note to the documentation for case saying
this is not the same as 'case' in Scheme because it uses equal?, not eqv?
and giving a few examples to show the
Well, probably what's happening is that you got an error earlier and that
error left DrRacket in a strange state. Are you seeing any of this before
you see the first internal error box?
Meanwhile, I've pushed 2 fixes and the stacktrace you sent earlier is
definitely helping me hone in on another
Okay, I've pushed a fix for a bug that would explain the latest
stacktrace. Please let me know if you spot more problems!
Thanks,
Robby
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Robby Findler
ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu wrote:
Well, probably what's happening is that you got an error earlier and that
Great, thanks!
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 3:24 PM, Robby Findler
ro...@eecs.northwestern.eduwrote:
Okay, I've pushed a fix for a bug that would explain the latest
stacktrace. Please let me know if you spot more problems!
Thanks,
Robby
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Robby Findler
That kind of thing makes a lot of sense to me.
I'd probably write the code a little bit differently, having a
function that takes a string and sees if the text starting at
start-pos matches that string instead of having to special case the
numbers 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7. This will also let you just
Hi All,
I have implemented an alternative version of bit-vectors using bignums
to represent the bits.
As is the bignum implementation is much slower, than the vector-of-fixnum one.
The main reason as far as I can tell is due to bit-vector-set! .
Since bignums aren't mutable I can not simply
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Robby Findler ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu
wrote:
That kind of thing makes a lot of sense to me.
I'd probably write the code a little bit differently, having a
function that takes a string and sees if the text starting at
start-pos matches that string
I'd write a helper function like this:
(define (has? str) (equal? str (get-text start-pos (+ start-pos
(string-length str)
and call it a bunch (inside an 'or', one branch for each of those
strings that are currently in the second argument to member; or well,
even use a for/or, I guess). Or,
and call it a bunch (inside an 'or', one branch for each of those
strings that are currently in the second argument to member; or well,
even use a for/or, I guess). Or, if you wanted, you could change your
existing code to push the 'or' inside the 'and' and then drop the
promise.
Ok, I'll
If you're really worried about the allocation, you can work at the
snip level and pass in a buffer to be filled in with characters, you
know. :)
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 2:44 PM, Danny Yoo d...@hashcollision.org wrote:
and call it a bunch (inside an 'or', one branch for each of those
strings
On 11/24/2012 05:36 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
I'm probably missing the problem, which wouldn't be surprising since I
didn't even tried to look up the `array' documentation...
Well, it didn't exist until I pushed it on Saturday night, so looking it
up wouldn't have done you any good. :D
But,
Two hours ago, Neil Toronto wrote:
On 11/24/2012 05:36 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
I'm probably missing the problem, which wouldn't be surprising
since I didn't even tried to look up the `array' documentation...
Well, it didn't exist until I pushed it on Saturday night, so
looking it up
15 matches
Mail list logo
