Re: [racket-users] Package documentation link issue

2017-04-12 Thread Greg Hendershott
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote: > At Wed, 12 Apr 2017 14:17:39 -0400, Greg Hendershott wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 7:16 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote: >> > It's a bug in the pkg-build process, and I should have it fixed for the >> >

Re: [racket-users] Package documentation link issue

2017-04-12 Thread Matthew Flatt
At Wed, 12 Apr 2017 14:17:39 -0400, Greg Hendershott wrote: > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 7:16 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote: > > It's a bug in the pkg-build process, and I should have it fixed for the > > next build. > > It looks like that didn't run this (Wed) morning? The machine

Re: [racket-users] Package documentation link issue

2017-04-12 Thread Greg Hendershott
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 7:16 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote: > It's a bug in the pkg-build process, and I should have it fixed for the > next build. It looks like that didn't run this (Wed) morning? I only noticed and mention this because Tue evening I updated Frog. And this:

Re: [racket-users] Announcing Leibniz, a new language in the Racket universe

2017-04-12 Thread Shriram Krishnamurthi
The Lotka-Volterra example is very helpful, thanks. It is still a bit unclear from the formatting which part is the Leibniz code. Is it the two lines marked pp1 and pp2? Are they literal code? I guess I prefer to use a typewriter face to make verbatim code clear, though that may be at odds with

Re: [racket-users] Announcing Leibniz, a new language in the Racket universe

2017-04-12 Thread Konrad Hinsen
John Clements writes: > I really enjoyed poking around in this a bit. One thing that I would > really have appreciated, if it’s at all possible, would be a small > motivating example; preferably in the readme of that repo. Is that a > sensible request? Shriram

Re: [racket-users] [racket][draw] some APIs should be more open

2017-04-12 Thread George Neuner
On 4/11/2017 10:41 PM, WarGrey Gyoudmon Ju wrote: This is a little awkward, there are lots of simple classes defined in racket/draw, font%, color%, pen%, brush% and so on. They just hold a group of plain data, hence opportunities to be inspected easily. However by default all classes are

Re: [racket-users] [racket][draw] some APIs should be more open

2017-04-12 Thread Matthias Felleisen
Why should fonts and colors be mutable? > On Apr 11, 2017, at 10:41 PM, WarGrey Gyoudmon Ju > wrote: > > This is a little awkward, there are lots of simple classes defined in > racket/draw, font%, color%, pen%, brush% and so on. They just hold a group of > plain