I'm concerned about this:
+[sandbox-namespace-specs
+ (cons (λ () (namespace-anchor->namespace anchor))
It seems like this would cause all evaluators to share a single
namespace, if I'm reading the docs right. (That would be a good test to
add.) Why not
> Do you need to do the same thing with file/convertible?
The current version only attaches file/convertible.
>
> Robby
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Stephen Chang wrote:
>>
>> Here's another attempt at a patch. Would someone mind code reviewing it?
>>
>> Ryan pointed me towards sandbox
Do you need to do the same thing with file/convertible?
Robby
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Stephen Chang wrote:
> Here's another attempt at a patch. Would someone mind code reviewing it?
>
> Ryan pointed me towards sandbox-namespace-specs and it seems to do the
> trick. I also added some te
Here's another attempt at a patch. Would someone mind code reviewing it?
Ryan pointed me towards sandbox-namespace-specs and it seems to do the
trick. I also added some tests and the docs seem to compile ok.
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Robby Findler
wrote:
> namespace-attach-module sets up s
Tuesday was the beginning of the next release cycle. As you noticed,
we did not send out a start-of-release message. Instead we have decided
to postpone the beginning of the release cycle until approximately 10/24
so that we can get ready for the 6.0 release based on packages. Depending
o
I'm looking for someone to take over mailing list moderation and
possibly other similar work like monitoring newsgroups etc.
--
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!
This problem is related to the reference of a package-level "info.rkt"
from within a collection via a relative path. A relative path that
leaves a collection confuses the compilation manager.
So, it's a bug, but it's not related to dependency declarations --- or
even the package system, really.
A
t; *6d4ff30/catalog/<http://www.eecs.northwestern.edu/plt/snapshots/20130929-6d4ff30/catalog/>,
> i always get a 404. Is this intended?
>
>
These two are fixed now (with the snapshot build
http://plt.eecs.northwestern.edu/snapshots/20131003-154d940/).
Thanks!
Robby
_
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
> I'm pretty sure this is a bug in `setup/collects` (or maybe
> elsewhere), and I reported it as PR 14063.
Oh. In that case:
1. Thank you for logging the bug.
2. I'm sorry for the redundancy here on the mailing list.
_
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.o
I'm pretty sure this is a bug in `setup/collects` (or maybe
elsewhere), and I reported it as PR 14063.
Sam
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 9:57 AM, Greg Hendershott
wrote:
> Hmm, then maybe I'm misdiagnosing the error.
>
> If you were to try doing
>
> raco pkg install frog
>
> using 5.3.90.9 from HEAD
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Greg Hendershott
wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Jay McCarthy
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Greg Hendershott
> > The concept of backwards compatibility does not apply to beta software
> > in my opinion. The next release will be the first rel
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Jay McCarthy wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Greg Hendershott
> The concept of backwards compatibility does not apply to beta software
> in my opinion. The next release will be the first release where the
> package system is not beta.
I understand. OTOH th
Hmm, then maybe I'm misdiagnosing the error.
If you were to try doing
raco pkg install frog
using 5.3.90.9 from HEAD as of a few days ago, you would see something
like this:
greg@halo:~$ ~/src/plt/racket/racket/bin/raco pkg install frog
Resolving "frog" via https://pkg.racket-lang.org
Downloa
On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 7:40 AM, Greg Hendershott
wrote:
> After I gave my Frog talk at RacketCon, in which I said a goal of Frog
> was to make it easy to install, J. Ian Johnson tried to install it...
> but couldn't.
>
> As best I understand, it's because he was using Racket from HEAD, and
> at so
Yes, the `#:version` keyword is optional. The old format, as in
(define deps '(("markdown" "0.5")
"rackjure"))
is still supported.
The old format is described as "deprecated" in the documentation, but
it's fine to use it to support both v5.3.x and v.5.90.x.
At Thu, 3 Oct 2013 0
After I gave my Frog talk at RacketCon, in which I said a goal of Frog
was to make it easy to install, J. Ian Johnson tried to install it...
but couldn't.
As best I understand, it's because he was using Racket from HEAD, and
at some point recently the `deps` expression for info.rkt changed for
the
On 2013-10-03 06:45:12 -0600, Jay McCarthy wrote:
> In the first case, you are forgetting to do it and we warn to tell you
> what you should put. In the second case, you put them in but are wrong
> and should be CAUGHT and PUNISHED. I think that's the logic behind it.
That seems fair, but then in
At Thu, 3 Oct 2013 06:45:12 -0600, Jay McCarthy wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I noticed that if you don't specify any dependencies for a package, then
> > `raco` will warn you about that. However, the exit code is 0 and it's
> > not an "error".
On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I noticed that if you don't specify any dependencies for a package, then
> `raco` will warn you about that. However, the exit code is 0 and it's
> not an "error".
>
> Comparatively, if you supply a dependencies field of `empty`,
19 matches
Mail list logo
