Re: [racket-users] This v 8.1 collection path looks incorrect...

At Fri, 4 Jun 2021 14:46:00 -0700 (PDT), Don Green wrote: > > (current-library-collection-paths) > '(# > # #) > > I suspect the above is incorrect because I think the 8.1 path should be to > dir: /pkgs rather than /collects. Like this: > # Just to clarify, "collects" is as intended there.

Re: [racket-users] Regarding collections ...

At Fri, 4 Jun 2021 14:15:11 -0700 (PDT), Don Green wrote: > Sounds like ideally I should begin creating my own pkg(s) that are > outside a collection path, and link it by specifying a > current-library-collection-links parameter. Yes, you should use packages. You normally shouldn't need to set

Re: [racket-users] Re: config.rktd

At Fri, 4 Jun 2021 14:29:29 -0700 (PDT), Don Green wrote: > Now that I have learned of: config.rktd, > I think I'd rather use it, if it can be used to set > current-library-collection paths. > Should I just add to the config.rktd hash list: > (current-library-collection paths . > '(# > # #))

[racket-users] Re: Embedded Racket reimplementation for constrained hardware?

I think in such an environment I would like to control memory usage myself, or maybe have a #lang that allows very fine grained and low level control over resources. (outputting lowerlevel code than racket/base). If you need persistent data-structures they are nice, but often times you don't

[racket-users] Can a new user defined pkg encompass nothing more than references to previously defined pkgs?

Can a new user defined pkg encompass nothing more than references to previously defined pkgs so that every user created module references a single user defined pkg? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this

Re: [racket-users] Can a new user defined pkg encompass nothing more than references to previously defined pkgs?

On 6/6/21, Don Green wrote: > > Can a new user defined pkg encompass nothing more than references to > previously defined pkgs so that every user created module references a > single user defined pkg? Yes. You can make a new package whose main.rkt provides lots of identifiers from other

Re: [racket-users] Could Racket be used as a "frontend" for a non-Racket language?

Check out IronScheme ... it may be just what you're looking for. - Bob On Sun, Jun 6, 2021 at 10:02 PM Ryan Kramer wrote: > I have no plans to work on this, but I am curious if this has been > discussed or attempted... > > Motivation: My job has been

Re: [racket-users] Could Racket be used as a "frontend" for a non-Racket language?

nice, yes, I've long wanted that, in general. Like, I want to use {erlang,ADA,haskell,typescript,go,...} but with s-expr's and macros. One could instead perhaps leverage Graal and things like ABCL or Clojure? You could in theory use something like XMLVM and Clojure to at least cover C#/.net and

Re: [racket-users] Can a new user defined pkg encompass nothing more than references to previously defined pkgs?

On Sun, Jun 6, 2021 at 7:59 PM Ben Greenman wrote: > On 6/6/21, Don Green wrote: > > > > Can a new user defined pkg encompass nothing more than references to > > previously defined pkgs so that every user created module references a > > single user defined pkg? > > Yes. You can make a new

[racket-users] Could Racket be used as a "frontend" for a non-Racket language?

I have no plans to work on this, but I am curious if this has been discussed or attempted... Motivation: My job has been C# for many years and while C# is very appropriate for most of the problems I encounter at work, sometimes a problem comes along that makes me want more power. In those

Re: [racket-users] Could Racket be used as a "frontend" for a non-Racket language?

I haven't done much with this personally, but a few pointers in Racket: - Urlang uses Racket's macro system as a front-end for JavaScript (in the way you discuss with C#, not compiling Racket to JavaScript): https://github.com/soegaard/urlang - Alexis King's Hackett is an experimental