Since you say that it requires dropping to the latex level, does it mean
that doing a synchronization of scribble and other output (say, HTML or
something else that doesn't require anything from outside scribble and
racket) can be done directly? Essentially:
```
@title{Synchronize this!}
Can
On 30/01/2019 02:32, Alex Harsanyi wrote:
> I know the report explains the various cases where Racket CS is slower than
> Racket 7.1, but I would like to mention that these cases are very
> significant,
> at least in my case -- I mention this because the report recommends making
> Racket CS the
I've put up the code I mentioned for email-sending and a proxy server at
https://github.com/LiberalArtist/multipart-writing-examples As noted, these
are not general-purpose solutions to either of those problems—I know of a
bunch of cases I don't cover, and I basically only have to use these with
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 4:17 AM Christopher Lemmer Webber <
cweb...@dustycloud.org> wrote:
>
> Any thoughts on how I should move forward?
I think that using a `data-procedure/c` of a particular sort should allow
you to implement this without needing access to the struct internals or
needing to
I know the report explains the various cases where Racket CS is slower than
Racket 7.1, but I would like to mention that these cases are very
significant,
at least in my case -- I mention this because the report recommends making
Racket CS the default, which I am very concerned about:
> To
On Jan 25, 2019, at 8:51 PM, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> Regarding hosting of the email list server... worst case, were Google Groups
> to shut down with no good migration offering... if we can't find a turn-key
> email list service we like, we could always run the time-honored MailMan on
> either
On Jan 29, 2019, at 3:08 PM, 'John Clements' via Racket Users wrote:
> For what it’s worth, I’m firmly in the “let’s wait and see” camp. I’m not
> worried about losing archives…I think I personally have just about all of the
> messages that have been posted to the google group, and I don’t
HTTP multipart reading is pretty easy to implement. You just want to be
careful about space performance -- not only because you might want
lots-and-lots of this processing going on on each server (and the costs
add up), but because the individual parts are quite often large (for the
purposes
On 1/29/2019 8:11 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
At Tue, 29 Jan 2019 04:17:53 -0500, Christopher Lemmer Webber wrote:
> Any thoughts on how I should move forward? Has anyone else written a
> multipart library I don't know about, for instance?
Is that the same as MIME's multipart as used in email?
For what it’s worth, I’m firmly in the “let’s wait and see” camp. I’m not
worried about losing archives…I think I personally have just about all of the
messages that have been posted to the google group, and I don’t think I’m
alone. So: for the moment, I’m not that concerned.
John
> On Jan
1784 at the moment, way beyond "500-750 users"
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 10:39 AM Jens Axel Søgaard
wrote:
> How many users are on the racket-users list?
>
> Are we anywhere near the listed numbers?
>
> Den lør. 26. jan. 2019 kl. 01.01 skrev 'Paulo Matos' via Racket Users <
>
How many users are on the racket-users list?
Are we anywhere near the listed numbers?
Den lør. 26. jan. 2019 kl. 01.01 skrev 'Paulo Matos' via Racket Users <
racket-users@googlegroups.com>:
> Apologies for message unrelated to racket, but it might affect us.
>
> Just read this:
>
>
A possible alternative to Google would be to host this group as a forum on
a public Fossil repository.
Fossil is a source control system similar to Git. But unlike Git, a fossil
repo can include its own forum (as well as wiki and issue tracking), and it
has a built-in web interface. A Fossil
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 04:34:49AM -0500, Philip McGrath wrote:
> I don't think there's a multipart-writing library yet, and it would be a
> great thing to have.
>
> I've written little multipart-writing functions for a small proxy server
> built on `http-sendrecv/url` and for sending email using
Here's a new status report on Racket CS:
http://blog.racket-lang.org/2019/01/racket-on-chez-status.html
Short version: Racket CS is done in a useful sense, but we'll wait
until it gets better before making it the default Racket
implementation.
Matthew
--
You received this message because
At Tue, 29 Jan 2019 04:17:53 -0500, Christopher Lemmer Webber wrote:
> Any thoughts on how I should move forward? Has anyone else written a
> multipart library I don't know about, for instance?
Is that the same as MIME's multipart as used in email? If so, see
I see... yeah, I thought about going this route but the reason it didn't
seem particularly "robust" to me is that I would have to read the entire
object into memory at once before passing it in as bytes. IMO it would
be better to have the option to provide ports with file data so the data
could
In order to do that you'd need to drop down to the latex level and use
a package there to help you. There is information about how to do that
here: http://docs.racket-lang.org/scribble/config.html . Here is a
post about packages you could use:
Can I do a side by side pdf using racket scribble? Imagine you have an
English text and want the Portuguese translation in the opposite column. If
yes, it brings another question, which is, can it be done with synchronized
paragraphs?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to
I don't think there's a multipart-writing library yet, and it would be a
great thing to have.
I've written little multipart-writing functions for a small proxy server
built on `http-sendrecv/url` and for sending email using `net/sendmail`
with html and text/plain alternatives. I'm happy to share
I'm looking to do multipart HTTP requests in Racket, though it looks
like there's no support at the moment.
I thought I might add a utility using the net/http-client library,
starting with making an adjusted http-conn-send! function. However, the
http-conn-(host/port/etc) struct accessors aren't
21 matches
Mail list logo
