>
> The calls that are missing appear to tail calls, and Racket performs
> tail-call optimization, so I imagine those missing functions are not
> really "on the stack" at the time of the error.
>
> I don't know that there is a way around this except to deliberately
> subvert the tail-call
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 09:04:49PM -0800, thomas.lynch wrote:
> I have a related question. I turned on error trace using the command line
> Robby
> suggested, but it doesn't give me a trace, but rather just the call point and
> error function. Here is an example, the trace should be f -> gg ->
At this point it is an oversight.
> On Nov 21, 2015, at 6:51 AM, Paolo Giarrusso wrote:
>
> list? is not available [1] in either BSL or BSL with list abbreviations. Why?
> Lists are used everywhere even in BSL, and `list?` literally appears in half
> its documented
> The objective here is to get a source/loc structure with call point from the
> stx passed into the syntax transformer. Is this what quote-srcloc is for?
I haven't had a need to use `quote-srcloc`. Although I don't know the
context of what you're trying to do, I wanted to check whether you
Coming late to this.
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:50:41 -0400, Neil Van Dyke
wrote:
>We are conducting a highly scientific poll.
>
>The question we want to answer is whether people would like for the
>Racket standard languages to have symbols that begin with the colon
The example in the manual for quote-srcloc shows it wrapped as a syntax object,
and it gives the correct call point location answer. however, when the result
from quoteloc is instead put in a variable, then variable has the wrong
location (not the call location of stx).
An explanation of this
list? is not available [1] in either BSL or BSL with list abbreviations. Why?
Lists are used everywhere even in BSL, and `list?` literally appears in half
its documented contracts in beginner docs [2] — how should students understand
them?
I've looked for reasons, to no avail. I've only
7 matches
Mail list logo