Re: [racket-dev] Planet 2 Beta Release

2012-12-02 Thread Sam Tobin-Hochstadt
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Jay McCarthy jay.mccar...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 7:09 PM, Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu wrote: Version-specific installation - Not to speak too much on Jay's behalf, but I think he isn't convinced that the new

Re: [racket-dev] Planet 2 Beta Release

2012-12-02 Thread Matthew Flatt
At Sun, 2 Dec 2012 10:15:56 -0500, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: - Developer convenience is important, and most of us use git HEAD, whose versions change quite rapidly. Consider installing packages to work with your git HEAD checkout as installation-specific packages. That way, there's no version

Re: [racket-dev] Planet 2 Beta Release

2012-12-02 Thread Matthew Flatt
Who here has tried using `raco link' for development? The default mode is user-specific but not version-specific, and I've found that default to be inconvenient. Usually, it turns out, I want an installation-specific link, because I want it linked only for my development version of Racket. When I

Re: [racket-dev] Planet 2 Beta Release

2012-12-02 Thread Sam Tobin-Hochstadt
On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu wrote: Who here has tried using `raco link' for development? I use `raco link` for all of my development -- once `raco link` was released, I basically gave up on Planet1 and used `raco link` for everything. The default mode is

Re: [racket-dev] Planet 2 Beta Release

2012-12-02 Thread Matthew Flatt
At Sun, 2 Dec 2012 10:55:01 -0500, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: I have mostly the opposite impression of `raco link`. I like the default behavior, but that may be a result of my use of a set of scripts [1] for managing Racket installations that makes basically everything into

Re: [racket-dev] Testing whether a procedure gets collected

2012-12-02 Thread Matthias Felleisen
On Dec 1, 2012, at 9:23 PM, Robby Findler wrote: I think the high-level answer is that you have to understand something about details that aren't currently specified but nevertheless are how things currently work and then make a test that will work when you make those additional assumptions

Re: [racket-dev] Testing whether a procedure gets collected

2012-12-02 Thread Robby Findler
On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Matthias Felleisen matth...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: On Dec 1, 2012, at 9:23 PM, Robby Findler wrote: I think the high-level answer is that you have to understand something about details that aren't currently specified but nevertheless are how things currently work

Re: [racket-dev] Planet 2 Beta Release

2012-12-02 Thread Danny Yoo
Exactly. That student is going to get an error message when DrRacket starts up saying that the handin tool is broken. They complain to someone, and so on. Or, even worse, the student can get the error message at Check Syntax time, after which because it's an internal error, DrRacket goes

Re: [racket-dev] Testing whether a procedure gets collected

2012-12-02 Thread Neil Toronto
On 12/02/2012 12:10 PM, Robby Findler wrote: On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Matthias Felleisen matth...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: On Dec 1, 2012, at 9:23 PM, Robby Findler wrote: I think the high-level answer is that you have to understand something about details that aren't currently specified