I think that people coming from python will expect that `in-range`s
name is `range`. So why not meet their expectations?
Robby
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 7:51 PM, Andrew Kent wrote:
> Is the beginner confusion then simply going to shift to "why is 'for' w/
> 'range' fast but 'for' w/ 'other-list-fu
Is the beginner confusion then simply going to shift to "why is 'for' w/
'range' fast but 'for' w/ 'other-list-function' is not?"
(Not trying to be negative -- I just wonder if it might just further delay
people's realizing there are both functions and special syntactic forms for
things like 'f
Go for it!!
Robby
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Alexis King wrote:
> A question[1] was asked on Stack Overflow today that used `range` from
> racket/list in a for loop, then was baffled as to why it was so slow compared
> to a manually written loop using named let. To some extent, confusio
A question[1] was asked on Stack Overflow today that used `range` from
racket/list in a for loop, then was baffled as to why it was so slow compared
to a manually written loop using named let. To some extent, confusion of this
sort is unavoidable, since it stems from a confusion about the differ
Sorry, I just realized I posted this in the wrong group >_<
On Tuesday, January 3, 2017 at 8:36:42 AM UTC-7, jer...@g.clemson.edu wrote:
>
> Hi Racketeers,
>
> Does anyone have a CRC-16-CCITT implementation in Racket? I didn't see
> it in the pkgs site, I thought someone might have an unpublishe
Hi Racketeers,
Does anyone have a CRC-16-CCITT implementation in Racket? I didn't see it
in the pkgs site, I thought someone might have an unpublished version they
might like to share.
Thanks,
Jerry
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Devel
