Re: [racket-users] Multiple namespaces in Racket

> On Oct 17, 2017, at 20:11, Philip McGrath > wrote: > > It wouldn't solve the problem with shadowing `require`d identifiers, > but would having `#%module-begin` introduce the `require` (with proper > lexical context information), instead of doing it with the reader, >

Re: [racket-users] Multiple namespaces in Racket

On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 10:02 PM, Alexis King wrote: > > > 1. The issue with module language imports still seems hopeless. It wouldn't solve the problem with shadowing `require`d identifiers, but would having `#%module-begin` introduce the `require` (with proper lexical

Re: [racket-users] Multiple namespaces in Racket

I’ve been continuing to work on this for the past two days, and I’ve managed to get a lot more working. I figured I’d write a (somewhat shorter) summary of what I have and haven’t solved. 1. The issue with module language imports still seems hopeless. 2. I managed to solve the submodule

[racket-users] Re: code reflection

On Mon, 16 Oct 2017 17:11:53 -0400, Matthias Felleisen wrote: >> On Oct 16, 2017, at 2:17 PM, George Neuner wrote: > >> Lisp's macros are ... I won't say easier to use correctly, because >> they aren't ... but IMO they are easier to understand and

Re: [racket-users] code reflection

> On Oct 17, 2017, at 1:35 PM, Alexis King wrote: > > > I agree that it would be nice to have a better introduction to Racket’s > macro-writing facilities that starts with basics and scales to advanced > topics (the syntax-rules/syntax-case/syntax-parse duplicity is >

Re: [racket-users] Multiple namespaces in Racket

> On Oct 16, 2017, at 2:00 PM, Alexis King wrote: > > Apologies for the very long email, but this issue has ended up being much > more nuanced than I had hoped Thank you for taking the time to write this up. Fascinating — Matthias -- You received this message

Re: [racket-users] code reflection

I’ve noticed that the Racket macro system seems to have a reputation for being impenetrably complicated, which I do not fully understand. Hackett has, indeed, exposed a great deal of complexity, but Hackett is not an ordinary macro, and I found writing macros with syntax/parse to be quite pleasant

Re: [racket-users] European Racketeers and conferences

I just changed the map settings so anyone can edit it. If you'd like to add your city to the map: 1. Look for "racketeers.csv" in the menu 2. Click the "vertical dots" to the right of "racketeers.csv". (If you hover the mouse over these dots, it should say "Layer Options") 3. Click "Open Data

Re: [racket-users] code reflection

> On Oct 17, 2017, at 2:36 AM, Konrad Hinsen wrote: > > On 16/10/2017 23:11, Matthias Felleisen wrote: > >> Lisp macros are easier than Racket’s in the same way that it >> was so much easier to write procedures in ASM than in Pascal. > > Having used both, I fully

Re: [racket-users] European Racketeers and conferences

Well I am sure glad we reached two dozens :-) > On Oct 17, 2017, at 11:35 AM, Ben Greenman > wrote: > > Here's a map to some cities where some Racket users are located: > > https://drive.google.com/open?id=1i3zN11e_6te5ytduAiv1cidrIi4=sharing > > -- > You

Re: [racket-users] European Racketeers and conferences

Here's a map to some cities where some Racket users are located: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1i3zN11e_6te5ytduAiv1cidrIi4=sharing -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails

Re: [racket-users] Re: code reflection

On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 2:36 AM, Konrad Hinsen wrote: > I never got > around to work on this seriously, both because of the 24-hour-per-day limit > that I cannot seem to get rid of, When you figure that one out, don't forget to open source your solution, okay? Or,