Your C code doesn't cooperate with the "3m" garbage collector, which is
the way Racket is built by default. For example, the object that `env`
references might be moved by the GC without the `env` variable being
updated.
See
http://docs.racket-lang.org/inside/embedding.html#%28part._3m_.Embeddin
Get it! Thank you, Asumu.Btw, crossing post is my fault, not yours.在 2016年3月1日，上午7:30，Asumu Takikawa 写道：On 2016-02-29 17:24:26 +0800, simmone wrote:When I use at-exp to build my test data, I found it’ll eat prefix space, it’s a bug?This behavior is intentional, but if you really need to preserve t
If you're worried about the overhead of contracts (Typed Racket-generated
or otherwise), you should try the contract profiler (`raco contract-profile`
or `(require contract-profile)`). It should report whether contracts are
indeed a significant source of overhead in your programs, and if so, which
I'm trying to embed Racket into a test C program (minimal.c). I can
successfully compile it with clang on Mac OS X, but the program segfaults when
I try to run it. Any idea on what I'm doing wrong?
#include
#include
#include "base.c"
static int our_scheme_main(Scheme_Env *env, int argc, ch
Whoops, sorry for cross-posting this to the wrong list. I meant to post it to
racket-dev.
Cheers,
Asumu
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to racket-u
On 2016-02-29 17:24:26 +0800, simmone wrote:
> When I use at-exp to build my test data, I found it’ll eat prefix space, it’s
> a bug?
This behavior is intentional, but if you really need to preserve the spacing
you can use @|| to explicitly tell the @-exp reader to keep spaces.
(see very bottom
One more clarification :p
Contracts are always checked at run-time. Each time you call a function
with a contract on it, you need to check the contract.
Typed functions called from typed code are checked at compile-time. They're
both safe and fast at run-time.
The tricky part is when typed and u
On 2016-02-29 11:01:17 -0800, Nota Poin wrote:
> I'm not sure what the qualitative distinction is between contracts and Typed
> Racket. They seem like two syntaxes for what mostly amount to the same thing.
>
> [...]
>
> Is it that contracts are more general, not always necessarily contracts of
> f
On 2016-02-18 00:06:56 -0800, Alexis King wrote:
> It seems that possibly Typed Racket’s identifiers somehow do something
> similar, though not quite the same? That is, they are provided with
> contracts when used in an untyped module but provided bare when used in
> another typed module? Could tha
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 3:06 AM, Alexis King wrote:
> I have a macro that creates a transformer binding. This binding has
> prop:procedure on it, so when used, it functions as a macro and expands
> into something else. This works great, but I have another requirement:
> when this binding is provid
Typed Racket is its own language and uses a custom module handler to do things
like add meta-data to the compiled module and implement an inter-module
protocol. Check out "Advanced Macrology and the Implementation of Typed
Scheme," by Culpepper et al, for an overview. Let me know if you figure
Hi Nota,
The short answer is that Typed Racket generates contracts, and those
contracts sometimes have significant overhead at run time.
In specific cases, sometimes Typed Racket can generate smarter
contracts, because it knows that the typed code won't break the
contract. But other times, it doe
I'm not sure what the qualitative distinction is between contracts and Typed
Racket. They seem like two syntaxes for what mostly amount to the same thing.
Is it just a matter of implementation, or perhaps what their developers focus
on? You could in theory read through a list of contracts, and o
Cool!
On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 at 10:24, Jens Axel Søgaard
wrote:
> I guess we now have a new project to add on the Wiki: write a Racket
> program that parses an ispell dictionary.
>
> /Jens Axel
>
>
> 2016-02-29 11:09 GMT+01:00 Jos Koot :
>
>> Tabks for the replies.
>> I tried your last pointer, but
I guess we now have a new project to add on the Wiki: write a Racket
program that parses an ispell dictionary.
/Jens Axel
2016-02-29 11:09 GMT+01:00 Jos Koot :
> Tabks for the replies.
> I tried your last pointer, but without luck.
> I decided to let it go. It is not that much important for me
Tabks for the replies.
I tried your last pointer, but without luck.
I decided to let it go. It is not that much important for me
(it may be important for others, though)
Thanks again, Jos
_
From: Stephen De Gabrielle [mailto:spdegabrie...@gmail.com]
Sent: sábado, 27 de febrero de 2016 14
16 matches
Mail list logo
