On Dec 17, 2012, at 12:59 AM, Neil Toronto wrote:
On 12/16/2012 06:41 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
10 minutes ago, Neil Toronto wrote:
I think I'd rather have a convention in Typed Racket that (require foo)
imports `foo/typed' when it exists.
+14. I think it came up in the past, but I don't
On 2012-12-17 09:54:36 -0500, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
It has serious performance implications for untyped modules that
require plot -- and these should not be hidden.
My understanding (possibly wrong), was that the typed submodule would
only be required from another typed module in this
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 12:59 AM, Neil Toronto neil.toro...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/16/2012 06:41 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
10 minutes ago, Neil Toronto wrote:
I think I'd rather have a convention in Typed Racket that (require foo)
imports `foo/typed' when it exists.
+14. I think it came
20 minutes ago, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 12:59 AM, Neil Toronto neil.toro...@gmail.com wrote:
On 12/16/2012 06:41 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
10 minutes ago, Neil Toronto wrote:
I think I'd rather have a convention in Typed Racket that (require foo)
imports
I've long thought something along these lines is a good idea, but perhaps
what I think is a good idea isn't what Matthias and Sam think is the bad
idea.
I think that it makes sense for 'require' in typed-racket to look in a
different place than 'require' in untyped racket looks so that one can
When Neil created his library, I proposed that he create one piece of source
code and 'generate' both the typed and untyped module from it.
If we foresee this kind of library to become more common, we should probably
provide the capability as an abstraction from TR.
-- Matthias
On Dec
I think TR does have some of this facility already.
Robby
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Matthias Felleisen matth...@ccs.neu.eduwrote:
When Neil created his library, I proposed that he create one piece of
source code and 'generate' both the typed and untyped module from it.
If we
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Robby Findler
ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu wrote:
I've long thought something along these lines is a good idea, but perhaps
what I think is a good idea isn't what Matthias and Sam think is the bad
idea.
I think that it makes sense for 'require' in typed-racket
I don't think so. What it has is a declaration that says don't check the
types.
What I am proposing is
-- check the types
-- and generate an untyped version from this file.
#lang typed/racket #:check-and-generate untyped-foo.rkt
(: x Integer)
(define x 10)
would generate
#lang
At Mon, 17 Dec 2012 15:51:38 -0500, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 3:27 PM, Robby Findler
ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu wrote:
I've long thought something along these lines is a good idea, but perhaps
what I think is a good idea isn't what Matthias and Sam think is the bad
I don't understand Matthias's performance comments. If, in TR (require
plot) actually gives me a typed version of the library and in R (require
plot) gives me the untyped version of the library, then I am avoiding the
performance the untyped/typed performance overhead properly. If, on the
other
It is getting exactly the same file as R, except there is a special file in
the TR code that gives types to some bindings (all of the ones from
racket). Your new module's bindings are not in this file.
https://github.com/plt/racket/blob/master/collects/typed-racket/base-env/base-env.rkt
On Mon,
For the purposes of this conversation, I don't think it is fair to stop
after the comma in your sentence, Eric. :)
Robby
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Eric Dobson eric.n.dob...@gmail.comwrote:
It is getting exactly the same file as R, except there is a special file
in the TR code that
My understanding is that
-- Neil created a single file P, I believe it is typed
-- he tells you to load plot/typed/ for the typed version
-- he tells you to load plot/ for the untyped version
Somewhere in this arrangement a call in some untyped client to a function f
from P will cross a
On 12/17/2012 02:44 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
My understanding is that
-- Neil created a single file P, I believe it is typed
-- he tells you to load plot/typed/ for the typed version
-- he tells you to load plot/ for the untyped version
Somewhere in this arrangement a call in some
On Dec 17, 2012, at 5:43 PM, Neil Toronto wrote:
On 12/17/2012 02:44 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
My understanding is that
-- Neil created a single file P, I believe it is typed
-- he tells you to load plot/typed/ for the typed version
-- he tells you to load plot/ for the untyped
On 12/17/2012 03:55 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
On Dec 17, 2012, at 5:43 PM, Neil Toronto wrote:
On 12/17/2012 02:44 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
My understanding is that
-- Neil created a single file P, I believe it is typed
-- he tells you to load plot/typed/ for the typed version
On Dec 17, 2012, at 6:10 PM, Neil Toronto wrote:
`plot' is written in untyped Racket. There's no performance problem with
typed plots at all; in fact, using `plot/typed' from TR code ends up
checking exactly the same contracts for the same plots. `plot/typed' is
just another end-user
On 12/17/2012 04:32 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
On Dec 17, 2012, at 6:10 PM, Neil Toronto wrote:
`plot' is written in untyped Racket. There's no performance problem with typed
plots at all; in fact, using `plot/typed' from TR code ends up checking exactly
the same contracts for the same
Okay. I propose we figure out how to allow people programming in Typed Racket,
and deploy two copies of the code without performance overhead for either T or U
code.
_
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
That is what I meant to be asking for. I put too much of what I guess would
be a good approach into my messages, tho. Sorry about that.
Robby
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Matthias Felleisen matth...@ccs.neu.eduwrote:
Okay. I propose we figure out how to allow people programming in Typed
I, perhaps unsurprisingly, disagree. If `listt.rkt` re-provided
everything from `list.rkt`, then it would continue to work. These
decisions are made entirely on the basis of the particular identifiers
involved -- which module is loaded has nothing to do with it.
But regardless of exactly how
Fine. I give up.
Robby
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 7:55 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt sa...@ccs.neu.eduwrote:
I, perhaps unsurprisingly, disagree. If `listt.rkt` re-provided
everything from `list.rkt`, then it would continue to work. These
decisions are made entirely on the basis of the particular
Changing the subject line for wider appeal.
On 12/16/2012 06:41 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
10 minutes ago, Neil Toronto wrote:
I think I'd rather have a convention in Typed Racket that (require foo)
imports `foo/typed' when it exists.
+14. I think it came up in the past, but I don't know why
24 matches
Mail list logo
