[racket-users] Re: raco setup equivalent for building standalone executables?

2019-11-08 Thread Alex Harsanyi
There is no such raco command, as far as I know. I see two possible solutions to your problem: 1) Place the raco commands in a shell script, so that the application can be built by running the single shell script 2) The raco pkg, make, exe and distribute commands all provide a Racket level

Re: [racket-users] What's the best way to do these syntax transforms?

2019-11-08 Thread Philip McGrath
On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 5:06 PM Christopher Lemmer Webber < cweb...@dustycloud.org> wrote: > Huh... somehow I had thought that I had heard that Racket has mutable > strings by default. It cropped up on my TODO list because of that. I > wonder what gave me that impression? > Racket strings are

Re: [racket-users] What's the best way to do these syntax transforms?

2019-11-08 Thread Philip McGrath
On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 2:58 PM Matthew Flatt wrote: > More precisely, the reader (via `read-syntax`) creates immutable > strings. > > If a macro constructs a mutable string and converts it to a syntax > object, the string is not converted to an immutable string. Maybe it > should be. > I see

Re: [racket-users] What's the best way to do these syntax transforms?

2019-11-08 Thread Christopher Lemmer Webber
Jay McCarthy writes: > On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:51 AM Christopher Lemmer Webber < > cweb...@dustycloud.org> wrote: > >> I have a need to do two things in a #lang: >> >> - Most importantly, make all strings that appear in the source code >>immutable >> > > Make #%datum turn literal strings

Re: [racket-users] What's the best way to do these syntax transforms?

2019-11-08 Thread Christopher Lemmer Webber
Philip McGrath writes: > On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:56 AM Jay McCarthy wrote: > >> On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:51 AM Christopher Lemmer Webber < >> cweb...@dustycloud.org> wrote: >> >>> I have a need to do two things in a #lang: >>> >>> - Most importantly, make all strings that appear in the source

Re: [racket-users] What's the best way to do these syntax transforms?

2019-11-08 Thread Matthew Flatt
At Fri, 8 Nov 2019 11:28:46 -0500, Philip McGrath wrote: > On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:56 AM Jay McCarthy wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:51 AM Christopher Lemmer Webber < > > cweb...@dustycloud.org> wrote: > > > >> I have a need to do two things in a #lang: > >> > >> - Most importantly,

[racket-users] DTLS

2019-11-08 Thread James Platt
I looking at implementing DTLS (TLS for UDP) and I see that ports->ssl-ports in the openssl package does not specify that the port has to be TCP. Does that mean that this should already work with UDP? If so, has anyone done much work with this? James -- You received this message because

Re: [racket-users] What's the best way to do these syntax transforms?

2019-11-08 Thread Philip McGrath
On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:56 AM Jay McCarthy wrote: > On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:51 AM Christopher Lemmer Webber < > cweb...@dustycloud.org> wrote: > >> I have a need to do two things in a #lang: >> >> - Most importantly, make all strings that appear in the source code >>immutable >> > > Make

Re: [racket-users] What's the best way to do these syntax transforms?

2019-11-08 Thread Jay McCarthy
On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:51 AM Christopher Lemmer Webber < cweb...@dustycloud.org> wrote: > I have a need to do two things in a #lang: > > - Most importantly, make all strings that appear in the source code >immutable > Make #%datum turn literal strings `s` into `(string->immutable-string

[racket-users] What's the best way to do these syntax transforms?

2019-11-08 Thread Christopher Lemmer Webber
I have a need to do two things in a #lang: - Most importantly, make all strings that appear in the source code immutable - Second and not as urgent, I'd like to add a "dot" notation, so that (foo.bar 1 2 3) expands into (foo 'bar 1 2 3) It seems to me that both of these needs are

Re: [racket-users] Re: How to install an updated version of an installation-wide package?

2019-11-08 Thread 'Reuben Thomas' via Racket Users
Thanks, Matthew. I'm currently stuck building racket, on which I shall post a separate question, but I shall use this method once I've made that work! On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 at 13:37, Matthew Flatt wrote: > It's not technically ok to shadow a package in installation scope with > one in user scope,

Re: [racket-users] Re: How to install an updated version of an installation-wide package?

2019-11-08 Thread 'Reuben Thomas' via Racket Users
On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 at 13:37, Matthew Flatt wrote: > It's not technically ok to shadow a package in installation scope with > > Meanwhile, the current tools are better set up for starting with a > GitHub checkout and building there. In that setting, for example, it's > easier to use `raco pkg

Re: [racket-users] How to install an updated version of an installation-wide package?

2019-11-08 Thread 'Reuben Thomas' via Racket Users
On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 at 19:01, John Clements wrote: > > raco pkg update —clone drracket > > in, say, your home directory should clone the package that includes the > drracket collection (and possibly others that are in the same package). > After this is complete, your drracket should depend on

[racket-users] Problem building racket in-place

2019-11-08 Thread 'Reuben Thomas' via Racket Users
I have a CONFIG_SITE environment variable which contains the following line: test "$prefix" = NONE && prefix="$HOME_LOCAL" (HOME_LOCAL is set to $HOME/.local) Things then go wrong because racket/src/start/configure.ac code relies on prefix still being set to NONE in order to finally set prefix

Re: [racket-users] Re: How to install an updated version of an installation-wide package?

2019-11-08 Thread Alex Harsanyi
On my machine, when I run the first command that you suggested, I get: $ raco pkg update --lookup --catalog https://pkgs.racket-lang.org/ slatex open-output-file: cannot open output file path: C:\Program Files\Racket\share\pkgs\_LOCKpkgs.rktd system error: Access is denied.; errid=5 Inferred