#lang racket
;; This is the message passing approach to the patience solitaire game
;; Flower Garden.
;;
;; This is the variant Flower Moon Garden with a relaxed ruleset. You
;; can move only one card at time but from anywhere to anywhere.
;; Sequences in the flower beds have to be build by
Hi,
I'm trying to run the benchmarks following
http://docs.racket-lang.org/redex/benchmark.html .
As paragraph 3.6 suggests, I do
./run-benchmark -a models/stlc+lists/stlc-info.rkt
but no counterexample seems to be found.
What am I doing wrong?
Here's a part of the output.
Running stlc-1 for
In case you find it interesting, here’s a macro in the implementation of
syntax-parse that is similar in spirit:
http://git.racket-lang.org/plt/blob/HEAD:/racket/collects/syntax/parse/private/runtime.rkt#l42
On May 6, 2015, at 1:21 AM, Jack Firth jackhfi...@gmail.com wrote:
I find that 99% of
Hello -
It looks like that section of the docs needs some additions. There are a few
command-line arguments you need to adjust the intervals things run for (and the
default is 0). For example, to run each bug/generator instance for 5 seconds,
use -s 5:
racket run-benchmark.rkt -s 5 -a
Thanks, I was looking in the reference instead of the guide, and
it has more information but less easy examples.
[Just for reference: (regexp-match #px\\.(?:\\p{N}|\\p{L})+$ zz.1ñ3é) ]
Gustavo
On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 12:08 AM, Evgeny Odegov evgeny-ode...@mail.ru wrote:
05.05.2015 20:41,
Hello,
I am working on a project in which I am trying to implement a Common Lisp-style
package system. A simple example of usage would be as follows:
(in-package FOO
(define BAR 2))
; ...
(in-package FOO
(define BAZ (add1 BAR)))
; ...
(in-package FOO
(add1 BAZ)) ;
Good news! With the add-line change that freeze operation on that huge fractal
finished!
time(img-expr): cpu time: 1552529 real time: 1567217 gc time: 576576
time(freeze(img)) : cpu time: 26904587 real time: 79234417 gc time: 20568080
What is that, about 7 and a half hours of cpu time, about
A few notes about what I learned when converting my `sugar` library to a dual
Typed Racket / Racket library (in part because of performance considerations).
http://unitscale.com/mb/technique/dual-typed-untyped-library.html
(Factual corrections welcome.)
--
You received this message because
At Wed, 06 May 2015 22:32:53 -0400, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
If I call `write-bytes` with mutable byte string S with value A, and
then, immediately after return from the call, I mutate S to value B...
is it nevertheless guaranteed that value A will be written?
Yes. I'll adjust the docs to
9 matches
Mail list logo
