Also, I would suggest that you use the package system, not planet for
new packages. Planet is a system we plan to continue to maintain, but
the package system is the future (and the present, really).
You can read more about how to get started here:
http://docs.racket-lang.org/pkg/index.html
Robby
In addition to agreeing with you and Sam here Alexis, I would like to
point out another thing that has worked well for Racket in design
situations such as these: benevolent despotism.
That is, the person in charge of the design is expected to fully and
deeply understand what they have designed and
Yes, sorry, I've been traveling and didn't have time to respond. I was
originally tempted to say "statically typed" and then realized that wasn't
exactly right, because it was not static types that would forbid such a
construction, so I said "static languages" suggesting languages where
things cann
I just put in a catch for this. If you can let me know if it squashes
it would be great!
Jay
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 12:19 AM, John B. Clements
wrote:
>
>> On Oct 6, 2015, at 6:58 AM, Jay McCarthy wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure if this answers the question...
>>
>> These errors are coming from the We
At Wed, 7 Oct 2015 17:35:44 -0700 (PDT), Anurag Mendhekar wrote:
> Having just submitted my first contribution to Planet
[Note: We use the name "Planet" for an older package system. I see that
you uploaded a package in the new system; assuming that you didn't also
upload to the old system, calling
(Old thread ...)
I only want to add an example of identifier capture. Here the
identifier _it_ is not bound at the macro compiling time, but is bound
at the final code. Note: Capture is discouraged in Racket.
I think that 99% of the times, the unbound identifiers are just typos,
like displyaln. S
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 9:18 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> At Wed, 7 Oct 2015 17:35:44 -0700 (PDT), Anurag Mendhekar wrote:
>> Having just submitted my first contribution to Planet
>
> [Note: We use the name "Planet" for an older package system. I see that
> you uploaded a package in the new system; a
Why Rackjure
- rackjure is something I started casually, didn't expect it would
ever get 100 stars. On the other hand, I suspect nearly all of those
stars are "huh, interesting". Not "I actually use this". :)
- I have no emotional investment in it. Just feel an obligation to
support it for whoeve
> Duplication is an uncomfortably common problem in Lispy circles, but
> fragmentation is never a good thing
To be fair, there are plenty of good reasons why duplication / fragmentation
would exist, many of them ultimately beneficial to the underlying system.
Fragmentation is not per se bad. St
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 10:56 AM, Greg Hendershott
wrote:
> - If you do want a Clojure style threading _macro_, rackjure's is the
> best implementation now AFAIK. I say that with no ego because that's
> mostly thanks to help from people like Sam and Christoffer Sawicki.
> Among other things, it's c
> On Oct 8, 2015, at 9:00 AM, Lyle Kopnicky wrote:
>
> Yes, sorry, I've been traveling and didn't have time to respond. I was
> originally tempted to say "statically typed" and then realized that wasn't
> exactly right, because it was not static types that would forbid such a
> construction,
Thanks for the detailed response, and apologies for the confusion regarding
the nomenclature. I did use the new package system, but in my head it is
still planet :-)
Anything I can do about the failure on libWN?
Best,
A.
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 7:18 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> At Wed, 7 Oct 201
> On Oct 8, 2015, at 7:13 AM, Jay McCarthy wrote:
>
> I just put in a catch for this. If you can let me know if it squashes
> it would be great!
I’ll do that. Well, maybe. The machine that’s running this is as close to a
“production” server as it gets, for me, collecting data for the Solar
De
Cal Poly has a team competing in the Solar Decathlon this year, a nationwide
competition to build a spiffy solar house and bring it to Irvine for a week:
http://www.solardecathlon.gov/
As part of this, we built a small server running in Racket, natch. Here’s a web
page that’s a front-end for so
On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 23:02:23 -0500,
Jack Firth wrote:
> If this isn't going to be added to the core (and I don't think it
> should), then there would need to be some work done on exposure and
> making sure everyone who wants this functionality knows "look here
> first and only roll your own if this
Is there a type-predicate for flarray?
Berthold
--
---
Berthold Bäuml -- Head of Autonomous Learning Robots Lab
DLR, Robotics and Mechatronics Center (RMC)
Münchner Str. 20, D-82234 Wessling
Phone +49 8153 282489
http://www.robo
I decided to release my threading implementation as the “threading” package.
The documentation is here:
http://pkg-build.racket-lang.org/doc/threading/index.html
I’m okay with this because I wanted to pull them out of my utils package,
anyway, and they’re nice to have, even if we come up with a
The root of the problem seems to be that `-std=c89` disables C
preprocessor definitions like `linux`, so definition like `__linux__`
must be detected instead. Specifically, on x86-64 Linux, a cascade of
preprocessor-based configuration choices cause `mz_long_double` to be
either `long double` or `d
The details below avoid needing "libWN" on install. If you want to
enable tests of other things that need to use "libWN", see "Working
with Native Libraries" here:
http://pkg-build.racket-lang.org/about.html
At Thu, 8 Oct 2015 08:54:14 -0700, Anurag Mendhekar wrote:
> Thanks for the detailed r
On Oct 8, 2015, at 12:06 PM, "'John B. Clements' via Racket Users"
wrote:
> I am not volunteering to tackle this: well, maybe if I get promoted.
I herewith promote you to Chief Design Officer (CDO) through the powers
bestowed on me by our CEO (little does he know). -- Matthias
--
You recei
You don't think
(define-simple-macro (-> var:id expr:expr ...+)
(let* ([var expr] ...) var))
Is better?
It's more powerful, because it allows placeholders to be arbitrarily nested
within the expressions.
Also, it allows the user to supply their own identifier to use as a placeholder
instead o
Oh yeah? Well _I_ promote him to Grand Chief Design Office (GCDO)
though the powers bestowed on my by our CEO (little does he care).
Robby
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 1:04 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
> On Oct 8, 2015, at 12:06 PM, "'John B. Clements' via Racket Users"
> wrote:
>
>> I am not vo
> On Oct 8, 2015, at 11:08 AM, Alex Knauth wrote:
>
> You don't think
> (define-simple-macro (-> var:id expr:expr ...+)
> (let* ([var expr] ...) var))
>
> Is better?
No, actually I, I don’t. Threading macros are a convenience, just like
anonymous functions. I’d rather keep them simple and e
> On Oct 8, 2015, at 2:27 PM, Alexis King wrote:
>
>
>> On Oct 8, 2015, at 11:08 AM, Alex Knauth wrote:
>>
>> You don't think
>> (define-simple-macro (-> var:id expr:expr ...+)
>> (let* ([var expr] ...) var))
>>
>> Is better?
>
> No, actually I, I don’t. Threading macros are a convenience,
> On Oct 8, 2015, at 2:27 PM, Alexis King wrote:
>
> The original threading macro is a simple macro that unwinds nested function
> application. Implementation aside, I find that the most intuitive way to
> visualize it—introducing binding makes that more complicated, not less.
An ~> expressio
> My macro and Jack Firth's function both allow that.
Sounds like the solution is to go with a function instead of a macro then. If
you want that flexibility, I don’t think there’s any reason to stick with a
macro, anyway. The point-free package is very nice.
Alexis
--
You received this mess
I agree about using the function form for flexibility. (Alliteration!) The
macro form should be optimized for simple cases, because macros by nature
are less flexible. If you have a complex case, write actual functions.
You'll spend less time wrangling the syntax system that way.
On Thu, Oct 8, 20
> On Oct 8, 2015, at 11:12 AM, Robby Findler
> wrote:
>
> Oh yeah? Well _I_ promote him to Grand Chief Design Office (GCDO)
> though the powers bestowed on my by our CEO (little does he care).
>
I’m up for full at the end of this year, and I admit that I was thinking of a
Cal Poly promotion.
FWIW, I find my threading macro to be very powerful, pretty clear when
used complicatingly, and at about power-level 9,000:
https://github.com/jeapostrophe/exp/blob/master/threading-arrow.rkt
My opinion is to include something like this in remix along with some
nice syntax for cut (what ignorant
> On Oct 8, 2015, at 4:48 PM, Jay McCarthy wrote:
> A key thing that Remix has is buttery C-like syntax for infix dots. So
> you can write r.ul.x and it might be the same as (posn-x (rectangle-ul
> r)) if `r` were bound to a "dot transformer" that looked for .ul and
> so on.
(Off topic)
Sounds
> Quick! Should (~>> (~>> a b) (~>> c d)) be equal to (~>> (b a) (~>> c d)) ?
Well, I wouldn't want to write or read code like that. If I'm using a
threading macro, at all, it's to reduce nesting, and emphasize the
"flat", "pipeline" quality of some computations. As a result I'm not
eager to write
> On Oct 8, 2015, at 4:51 PM, Jack Firth wrote:
>
> Looking at that one, I'm against back-referencing N clauses with (<> n). I
> find it very difficult to read, and it strikes me as particularly fragile if
> you're inserting or removing steps into the flow as you edit it.
> Trying to count b
>
> My question is this: has anyone created a “built with Racket” badge that I
> could put at the bottom of this page? The closest things I have are the
> Racket badge at the top of racket-lang.org, and the ancient “powered by
> PLT” and “thank heavens for DrScheme” badges that I made ages ago.
>
>
> On Oct 8, 2015, at 1:34 PM, Jay McCarthy wrote:
>
> FWIW, I find my threading macro to be very powerful, pretty clear when
> used complicatingly, and at about power-level 9,000:
>
> https://github.com/jeapostrophe/exp/blob/master/threading-arrow.rkt
I have to agree with Jack and Alex here: I
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 6:23 PM, Alexis King wrote:
>> On Oct 8, 2015, at 1:34 PM, Jay McCarthy wrote:
>>
>> FWIW, I find my threading macro to be very powerful, pretty clear when
>> used complicatingly, and at about power-level 9,000:
>>
>> https://github.com/jeapostrophe/exp/blob/master/threadin
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 6:48 PM, Jay McCarthy wrote:
>
>>> My opinion is to include something like this in remix along with some
>>> nice syntax for cut (what ignorant people call "function literals".)
>>
>> I admit I can’t really disagree with this point. I’m mostly just interested
>> in what syn
On Oct 8, 2015, at 2:48 PM, Ian Barland wrote:My question is this: has anyone created a “built with Racket” badge that I could put at the bottom of this page? The closest things I have are the Racket badge at the top of racket-lang.org, and the ancient “powered by PLT” and “t
The more I think about it, the more I realize I really dislike specifying
the position of arguments in these anonymous function syntaxes. For
instance I would prefer this:
(λ (x y) (/ y x))
To this:
λ.(/ $.1 $.0)
In the common case, you won't need to flip any argument orders around. In
that cas
On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 6:05 PM, 'John Clements' via Racket Users <
racket-users@googlegroups.com> wrote:
>
> Curiously, I think we’re still incorporated as PLT Scheme, Inc.
>
No, the name is officially "PLT Design Inc." (no comma).
Robby
--
You received this message because you are subscribed
Here are some alternative badges I threw together earlier this afternoon:
http://imgur.com/a/WaKs5
No Racket code, though, because they were made in photoshop.
-- Cam
On Thursday, October 8, 2015 at 6:22:56 PM UTC-5, Robby Findler wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 6:05 PM, 'John Clements' via Rac
I couldn't easily see another place to make this comment.
I'm working on SRFI-122, YAAL (Yet Another Array Library), so I'm
studying other array libraries and am trying to understand
array-axis-permute in the math/array Racket library:
http://docs.racket-lang.org/math/array_transform.html?q=permu
41 matches
Mail list logo