On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 10:18 PM, Lawrence Woodman <
lwood...@vlifesystems.com> wrote:
> After a quick scrape of the packages directory I only found 4 packages
> using a github source that weren't pointing to the master branch:
> irc, mischief, websocket and xdgbasedir
>
Personally, I hadn't
On 08/26/13 14:27, Matthew Flatt wrote:
A _package name_ is something like "mischief", which you use for
installing and declaring dependencies. A _package implementation_ is
something that you download from, say,
https://github.com/carl-eastlund/mischief/tarball/
fe7119517a4dcd3f5c50973
Thanks. I swear I tried that, and I couldn't get it to work.
It's a bit awkward, though, because of the mixed output. "raco test"
has a very simplied (and parseable) test output. Mixing it with
(run-tests) has a mixed output. On failure, (run-test) gives the
number of tests failed. And then
Hello,
I'm writing some code to manipulate a few structs and in doing so have run
into a rub. There doesn't seem to be a convenient way to do functional
updates for structs.
Normally I'd use struct-copy, but I have neither the field nor the type
name at compile time, currently I have a macro that
Thank you, this is amazing! I am a Racketeer for life.
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 10:02 PM, Matthias Felleisen
wrote:
>
> Just add fuzzy-set? to the provide specification of fuzzy-set-library.
> Also add other functions as needed and provide them.
>
>
>
> On Aug 26, 2013, at 9:09 PM, Rian Shams wr
Ah! That makes a lot of sense (oops). Thanks for the help!
Dane
On 08/26/2013 02:34 AM, Tobias Hammer wrote:
I guess you should replace it in the function body too
diff --git a/opencl/c/syntax.rkt b/opencl/c/syntax.rkt
index 909b2c8..3848e1b 100644
--- a/opencl/c/syntax.rkt
+++ b/opencl/c/synt
Just add fuzzy-set? to the provide specification of fuzzy-set-library. Also
add other functions as needed and provide them.
On Aug 26, 2013, at 9:09 PM, Rian Shams wrote:
> Thank you, a fuzzy-set-library is exactly what I am looking for. Initially I
> tried to create this library using the
Thank you, a fuzzy-set-library is exactly what I am looking for. Initially
I tried to create this library using the methodology you describe from the
chapter on sets in "The Little Schemer," but after discovering structs in
Racket I switched over. More recently I have been trying to emulate the
set
Have you considered mining the style guide for such rules? -- Matthias
On Aug 26, 2013, at 2:03 PM, Jordan Johnson wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This fall I'm planning to be doing some further work towards a framework for
> writing briefer checker scripts for Eli's handin server, including assessmen
On 08/26/13 13:36, Jay McCarthy wrote:
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 12:57 AM, Lawrence Woodman
wrote:
I have been really impressed with Racket after using it for a month, but am
worried about the move away from a central repository for storing each
version of a package. I can see the advantage and
On 26/08/13 10:32, Jens Axel Søgaard wrote:
> One easy improvement, when using github, is to allow/ensure package
owners point to a
> specific release/tag .zip file and not worry about the checksum as
nothing is going to
> change until a new release/tag is specified.
It is not as easy as it se
Hi all,
This fall I'm planning to be doing some further work towards a framework for
writing briefer checker scripts for Eli's handin server, including assessment
of indentation and common poor idioms like (if X true false), for which Eli has
provided me a script (code-ayatollah.rkt) that he's
I recently got a pull request where someone defined a
`check-expansion` form to use with rackunit. Simplified excerpt:
#lang racket/base
(require syntax/parse/define)
(define-simple-macro (if-let [binding:id value:expr] then:expr else:expr)
(let ([binding value])
(if binding then else)))
At Mon, 26 Aug 2013 07:57:05 +0100, Lawrence Woodman wrote:
> I have been really impressed with Racket after using it for a month, but am
> worried about the move away from a central repository for storing each
> version of a package. I can see the advantage and simplicity of the new
> system, but
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 12:57 AM, Lawrence Woodman
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have been really impressed with Racket after using it for a month, but am
> worried about the move away from a central repository for storing each
> version of a package. I can see the advantage and simplicity of the new
> s
Yup
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 2:34 AM, Tobias Hammer wrote:
> I guess you should replace it in the function body too
>
> diff --git a/opencl/c/syntax.rkt b/opencl/c/syntax.rkt
> index 909b2c8..3848e1b 100644
> --- a/opencl/c/syntax.rkt
> +++ b/opencl/c/syntax.rkt
> @@ -216,13 +216,13 @@
>
> One easy improvement, when using github, is to allow/ensure package
owners point to a
> specific release/tag .zip file and not worry about the checksum as
nothing is going to
> change until a new release/tag is specified.
It is not as easy as it seems. Let's say I write module A which uses
speci
On 26/08/13 08:09, Grant Rettke wrote:
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Lawrence Woodman
wrote:
This is such a cause for concern to me because I'm developing an open source
application to be used commercially and need to be able to maintain a
certain level of stability. I could just keep copie
I guess you should replace it in the function body too
diff --git a/opencl/c/syntax.rkt b/opencl/c/syntax.rkt
index 909b2c8..3848e1b 100644
--- a/opencl/c/syntax.rkt
+++ b/opencl/c/syntax.rkt
@@ -216,13 +216,13 @@
(define (id:selector arg_id ... _param_type)
(case (hash-
19 matches
Mail list logo
