On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 10:28:55PM -0500, Shu-Hung You wrote:
> FWIW, because `.` is just cons, the program
> (define (F [X : T1] . [Y : T2]) 'e)
> is being read as:
> (define (F [X : T1] Y : T2) 'e)
> I guess that's the reason for having an extra '*' in the syntax.
Indeed. It works for
FWIW, because `.` is just cons, the program
(define (F [X : T1] . [Y : T2]) 'e)
is being read as:
(define (F [X : T1] Y : T2) 'e)
I guess that's the reason for having an extra '*' in the syntax.
On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 10:16 PM Sam Tobin-Hochstadt
wrote:
>
> The syntax looks like this:
>
On 6/1/2020 4:21 PM, Bogdan Popa wrote:
George Neuner writes:
> But Python's DB pool is threaded, and Python's threads are core
> limited by the GIL in all the major implementations (excepting
> Jython).
Python's Postgres pooling does not[1] use POSIX threads under the hood
to manage the
I may look into this in more detail later, but I ran a simple benchmark
comparison on my modest AWS EC2 server (ApacheBench can behave poorly on
MacOS).
1) I ran ApacheBench w/ 6 processes to fetch a simple "hello world" static
html file using only nginx. I got roughly 650 requests per second.
George Neuner writes:
> But Python's DB pool is threaded, and Python's threads are core
> limited by the GIL in all the major implementations (excepting
> Jython).
Python's Postgres pooling does not[1] use POSIX threads under the hood
to manage the connections if that's what you mean, nor is
On 6/1/2020 3:40 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
I'm skeptical both of the DB explanation and the multi-core
explanation. As you say, the difference between something like Django
and Racket is much too large to be explained by that. For example, on
the "plaintext" benchmark, Racket serves about
On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 3:52 PM Jens Axel Søgaard wrote:
>
> Den man. 1. jun. 2020 kl. 20.53 skrev Christopher Lemmer Webber
> :
>
>
> I think `case` were more important before `match` arrived.
> If you want to see how `case` can be implemented without hash-tables, look at
> William D Clinger's
Den man. 1. jun. 2020 kl. 20.53 skrev Christopher Lemmer Webber <
cweb...@dustycloud.org>:
> As I started typing this email and looking into the definition of case,
> I realized my assumptions are wrong.
>
> What I needed: something like case which dispatches on symbols, except
> not auto-quoting
The syntax looks like this:
(define (f [x : Number] . [y : String *]) : Number (+ x (length y)))
See the documentation for `define` in Typed Racket here:
I'm skeptical both of the DB explanation and the multi-core
explanation. As you say, the difference between something like Django
and Racket is much too large to be explained by that. For example, on
the "plaintext" benchmark, Racket serves about 700 req/sec (I get
similar results on my machine).
On Mon, Jun 01, 2020 at 10:58:09AM -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> Do you perhaps have some other binding shadowing the binding of `:`
> from Typed Racket? That produces the error message you get when I try
> it.
Not intentionally. I'll have to look carefully for possible candidates.
Or ask
Except maybe for one thing: I wonder if the version of case defined here
is written in such a way that is smart in that it never has to make said
hash table / alist more than once, at compile time. I'm guessing so?
Christopher Lemmer Webber writes:
> As I started typing this email and looking
As I started typing this email and looking into the definition of case,
I realized my assumptions are wrong.
What I needed: something like case which dispatches on symbols, except
not auto-quoting the arguments... I needed to evaluate them from the
lexical environment. So:
(let ([x 'foo])
On 6/1/2020 1:40 PM, Bogdan Popa wrote:
I replied earlier today off of my Phone, but, for whatever reason
(caught in the moderation queue?), it's not showing up in this thread.
Here's what it said:
The reason for poor performance relative to the other
langs/frameworks is that there
Racket News - Issue 32 is here!
No time to wait, go grab a coffee and enjoy!
https://racket-news.com/2020/06/racket-news-issue-32.html
--
Paulo Matos
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop
I replied earlier today off of my Phone, but, for whatever reason
(caught in the moderation queue?), it's not showing up in this thread.
Here's what it said:
The reason for poor performance relative to the other
langs/frameworks is that there is currently no easy way to take
advantage
On 6/1/2020 11:12 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
I think the biggest thing is that no one has looked at optimizing
these benchmarks in Racket. If you tried out running one of these
benchmarks and ran the profiler it would probably show something
interesting.
Sam
The code[1] itself isn't bad.
I think the biggest thing is that no one has looked at optimizing
these benchmarks in Racket. If you tried out running one of these
benchmarks and ran the profiler it would probably show something
interesting.
Sam
On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 6:43 AM hashim muqtadir
wrote:
>
> A new version of these
Do you perhaps have some other binding shadowing the binding of `:`
from Typed Racket? That produces the error message you get when I try
it.
Sam
On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 1:32 PM Hendrik Boom wrote:
>
> I'm sorry to keep pestering this list, but I'm out of my depth with the
> detailed syntax
On 5/29/20, Beatriz Moreira wrote:
>
>
> Hi, im a beginner with racket and im using it to implement a language in
> order to test its operational semantic rules.
>
> This is the function where i keep having the error:
>
> (define-metafunction FS
>
> call : env-ß classes address f ((x v)...) -> e
A new version of these benchmarks was just published ("Round 19"):
https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r19
Racket scores rather poorly (0 errors is nice, though). Anybody has any
guesses as to why this is? Racket performs well enough as far as I'm
concerned, and while I don't
Hi Andre
This was 100% caused by using an outdated version of DrRacket. In my case
the terminal window was just empty, no messages. It seems that If any of
your code produces an output in the REPL window of DrRacket that will cause
the terminal window to show.
Regards
Philip
On Monday, 1
22 matches
Mail list logo
