On 2016-02-06 12:14AM, Matthew Butterick wrote:
>I know that SO has a policy against RTFM-style one-link answers. They
>cloak it in nonsense about "the link might go away" or ...
Er...one-link answers are fine *if* you also quote the relevant bit so
it's available right there, without having to
On 2015-11-17 11:04AM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>On Nov 16, 2015, at 8:11 PM, Josh Grams <j...@qualdan.com> wrote:
>
>> - big-bang: seems to stop sending "leave" events after a while (Windows
>> 7, 64 bit Racket 6.2.1).
>
>I can't replicate but this sou
On 2015-11-17 06:43AM, Robby Findler wrote:
>On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 7:11 PM, Josh Grams <j...@qualdan.com> wrote:
>> - DrRacket: is there some way to set a key binding to rename a *variable*?
>
>c:x;m under mac os x. You may need to disable menu bindings for that
>to work
I've spent a week or two with 2htdp/universe in preparation for doing a
little intro to Racket talk. And...I have a few little things:
- DrRacket: is there some way to set a key binding to rename a symbol?
It's annoying that I have to switch to the mouse for that.
- big-bang: seems to stop
On 2015-09-23 09:46AM, Erich Rast wrote:
>Someone on stackoverflow gave me a working implementation in Python 3
>
>https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3269/
>
>but it uses advanced features and I have no clue how to translate this
>to Racket.
Like this?
#lang racket
(define combinations ;
On 2015-08-03 01:22AM, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
Eval might indeed be the perfect solution this time, iff every other
conceivable alternative has been rejected. :)
Shameless link to PSA on the topic of eval:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/2014-July/063597.html
Suggestions for
On 2015-05-28 09:59AM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
I know DrRacket has some downsides, but I sure wish many more people
would see the light, use it, and help identify and better yet fix the
problems.
I was interested in that, but couldn't figure out how to build it.
I had found a couple of things
Michael's Flower Garden inspired me to play with the games/cards,
but...the z-ordering of add-cards is backwards for every use that I've
been able to think of. I want the first card to be on the bottom, as if
I were dealing cards.
For now I have defined a function which reverses the card list
On 2015-05-21 07:15AM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
I've been working on a new model of macros for Racket.
http://www.cs.utah.edu/~mflatt/scope-sets-5/
Minor typo in the last paragraph of Section 1.1: insprired.
Also, shouldn't the x's under syntax-rules and in the expansion of
(m) have a 'b' in
Ah, now I see. It's not that I did the math wrong, it's that I
accepted his incorrect use of units. Thanks for taking the time to
clear that up for me even though it was kind of off-topic.
--Josh
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Racket Users group.
That is helpful, but my basic objection still stands: you're computing
with *times* while the claim in the article was about *speeds*, I think.
He says 50% more work using the same amount of CPU cycles, which I
read as work/time. So you need to take the reciprocal of all your
values. Don't you?
On 2015-04-13 12:29AM, George Neuner wrote:
Somebody doesn't understand fractions: the numbers show a 33%
improvement, not 50%. 3.7 is 50% slower, but 3.8 is only 33% faster.
Are you sure? I thought that at first, but those numbers are time
rather than speed, and when I checked my units
12 matches
Mail list logo
