Re: [racket-users] Mann-Whitney test?

2017-01-21 Thread James
> Does anybody have an implementation of the Mann-Whitney U test (or the > equivalent Wilcoxson Rank test) in Racket? I imagine I could easily hack up > my own, but somebody else may have done a better job of it already. I see that no one has answered this question yet. This is something

Re: [racket-users] Dynamic-require a compile-time identifier?

2017-01-21 Thread Alex Knauth
> On Jan 21, 2017, at 6:27 PM, Dupéron Georges > wrote: > > I was going to suggest `dynamic-require-for-syntax`, but it seems to do > exactly the same thing as `dynamic-require`, i.e. give the value of a phase-0 > provided identifier. Is this normal? > > The

[racket-users] MFlatt eval blog link broken in search engines

2017-01-21 Thread 'John Clements' via Racket Users
So I went looking for Matthew’s classic 2011 post on ‘eval’, today, and my friendly local search engine returned this link: https://blog.racket-lang.org/2011/10/on-eval-in-dynamic-languages-generally.html … which is now a 403 Forbidden. After some searching, I figured out that the correct link

[racket-users] Deserialization broken for class-based objects with contracted interfaces

2017-01-21 Thread Philip McGrath
Deserialization appears to be broken for class-based objects that implement interfaces with contracted methods. Given this example module: #lang racket (require racket/class racket/serialize) (define foo<%> (interface () [foo-method (->m any/c)])) (define-serializable-class* foo%

[racket-users] Re: Dynamic-require a compile-time identifier?

2017-01-21 Thread Dupéron Georges
I was going to suggest `dynamic-require-for-syntax`, but it seems to do exactly the same thing as `dynamic-require`, i.e. give the value of a phase-0 provided identifier. Is this normal? The `eval` trick is a good idea, I would say. From the couple of times I have used dynamic-require, I have

Re: [racket-users] How to watch the filesystem

2017-01-21 Thread David Storrs
Thanks, Dupéron, that's helpful. On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 8:35 PM, Dupéron Georges wrote: > Le vendredi 20 janvier 2017 19:47:11 UTC+1, David K. Storrs a écrit : >> I see that I can get the event telling me that something changed. As >> far as I can tell the event