I'm trying to give the `flvector-map' function a sensible type. A
stubbed-out attempt follows, along with an application of it that fails
typechecking.
#lang typed/racket
(require racket/flonum)
(: flvector-map
(case-> ((Flonum -> Flonum) FlVector -> FlVector)
((Flonum Flonum F
On 11/28/2012 06:04 PM, David Van Horn wrote:
On 11/28/12 7:53 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
Currently, `match` provides a pattern named `var`, which makes `(var
id)` equivalent to `id`, but without special cases for things like `_`
and `...`.
However, this frequently conflicts with structures
Yes, it would!
In the meantime, you can type
#'for*
and that'll trigger the docs.
The issue is that the documentation is built based on a non-error
expansion of the program. Until we change how that works, there won't
be any of the online check syntax information for parts that are
syntactica
On 11/28/12 7:53 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
Currently, `match` provides a pattern named `var`, which makes `(var
id)` equivalent to `id`, but without special cases for things like `_`
and `...`.
However, this frequently conflicts with structures that people define,
and is rarely used other t
Currently, `match` provides a pattern named `var`, which makes `(var
id)` equivalent to `id`, but without special cases for things like `_`
and `...`.
However, this frequently conflicts with structures that people define,
and is rarely used other than accidentally. I'd therefore like to
remove it
Note: taking this to dev since my reply isn't directly relevant to the
bug report.
On 2012-11-28 05:00:02 -0500, sper...@deinprogramm.de wrote:
> *** Description:
> So I tried to resurrect the "tr-pfds" collection with purely
> functional data structures. It's not quite up to data with the
> curr
Cool. I submitted a pull request with this change since it's always an
improvement.
Thanks,
-Ian
- Original Message -
From: "Matthew Flatt"
To: "J. Ian Johnson"
Cc: "dev"
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2012 12:58:09 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [racket-dev] for loop singl
I think that would be an ad hoc optimization in each `in-'. For example,
(define-sequence-syntax *in-set
(lambda () #'in-set)
(lambda (stx)
(syntax-case stx ()
[[(id) (_ st)]
in `racket/set' could change to
(define-sequence-syntax *in-set
(lambda () #'in-set)
(lambd
It would be great to optimize singletons out of comprehensions, since I (and
probably others) have macros that expand into singleton constructors that are
much better suited to just be a rebinding.
> (time (for ([n (in-range 1 100)]) (for ([k (in-set (set n))]) (random
> k
cpu time: 340
9 matches
Mail list logo