Wait, why two bugs? Won't fixing the second thing you mentioned also
fix the first? I guessed that multiple error messages were getting
merged but the wrong one was chosen. Is that not what is happening?
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 9:10 PM, Ryan Culpepper wrote:
> On 07/25/2013 05:41 PM, Stephen Chan
On 07/25/2013 05:41 PM, Stephen Chang wrote:
Here is a syntax-parse macro that requires one subexpression to be
wrapped with an exclamation point.
(define-syntax (test stx)
(syntax-parse stx #:datum-literals (!)
[((~or (~once (! x:expr) #:name "!")
(~not (! y:expr))) ..
Here is a syntax-parse macro that requires one subexpression to be
wrapped with an exclamation point.
(define-syntax (test stx)
(syntax-parse stx #:datum-literals (!)
[((~or (~once (! x:expr) #:name "!")
(~not (! y:expr))) ...)
#'42]))
Everything works like I would e
On 2013-07-25 12:36:32 -0600, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> My thought was that you should only use `handle-evt' if you need tail
> behavior for something like a loop. If you use `handle-evt' and you're
> not getting tail behavior (but `sync' continues on, anyway), then
> something has gone wrong --- and
My thought was that you should only use `handle-evt' if you need tail
behavior for something like a loop. If you use `handle-evt' and you're
not getting tail behavior (but `sync' continues on, anyway), then
something has gone wrong --- and maybe it's better to get an error than
have a slow leak tha
Yes, because the user-specific place is always in PLTADDONDIR.
At Thu, 25 Jul 2013 14:20:36 -0400, Carl Eastlund wrote:
> I currently use PLTADDONDIR to make each repo's packages install to a
> different place, within the repo tree, so that they're both separate, and
> get cleaned up if and when I
Probably we just didn't consider that! It does seem better.
Robby
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 1:06 PM, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
> On 2013-07-25 12:55:25 -0500, Robby Findler wrote:
> >I think the issue is that the tail guarantee can't be met if there
> are two
> >handles (one won't be in tail
I currently use PLTADDONDIR to make each repo's packages install to a
different place, within the repo tree, so that they're both separate, and
get cleaned up if and when I remove the repo. Will that still work with
these changes?
Carl Eastlund
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Matthew Flatt wr
On 2013-07-25 12:55:25 -0500, Robby Findler wrote:
>I think the issue is that the tail guarantee can't be met if there are two
>handles (one won't be in tail position wrt to the sync).
I understand. I guess what I'm asking is that there seem to be two
reasonable choices for the semantics h
I'm fine with it.
Jay
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> We currently have three packages scopes:
>
> * 'installation --- specific to an installation of Racket, where
> package files are written into the installation (for all users of
> the installation)
>
> * 'us
We currently have three packages scopes:
* 'installation --- specific to an installation of Racket, where
package files are written into the installation (for all users of
the installation)
* 'user --- specific to a user and version, where packages files are
written to a user-specif
After some fixes, mostly to contracts and documentation, I've pushed the
new generics and set features to the master branch.
Carl Eastlund
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Carl Eastlund wrote:
> My work on adding gen:set, and related changes to define-generics and
> gen:dict, is ready for rev
I think the issue is that the tail guarantee can't be met if there are two
handles (one won't be in tail position wrt to the sync).
Robby
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I had a question about `handle-evt` and synchronizable events in
> general. I was tryi
PS: this distinction seems like something not worth reflecting in the type
system.
Robby
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Robby Findler wrote:
> I think the issue is that the tail guarantee can't be met if there are two
> handles (one won't be in tail position wrt to the sync).
>
> Robby
>
>
Hi all,
I had a question about `handle-evt` and synchronizable events in
general. I was trying to understand the documentation and only have a
partial idea of the motivation behind `handle-evt` and the contracts of
`handle-evt` and `wrap-evt`.
In particular, what is the motivation for disallowing
That fixed it, thanks Matthew!
Carl Eastlund
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> When you visit the main user-specific documentation page, then a cookie
> is installed to remember that page as your user-specific page (which
> would include user-scoped packages). The search
When you visit the main user-specific documentation page, then a cookie
is installed to remember that page as your user-specific page (which
would include user-scoped packages). The search box uses that cookie
(on pages that are in the installation) to jump back to user-specific
documentation for a
Thanks for the report! This information looks consistent with a bug
that I recently fixed in the development version, and I've recommended
a back-ported repair to be included in v5.3.6.
At Thu, 25 Jul 2013 18:31:13 +0700 (NOVT), "oev" wrote:
> It seems like the problem is kind of described at
> ht
It seems like the problem is kind of described at
http://www.mail-archive.com/users@racket-lang.org/msg18395.html
I was working long time and have got DrRacket "not responding" after 'New
Tab' click.
I use pre-release 32-bit version 5.3.5.900 on Windows 7 Professional SP1
64bit. Run DrRacket with
19 matches
Mail list logo
