I'll fix the type of `processor-count' and change the math docs.
Neil ⊥
On 12/12/2012 08:16 AM, Robby Findler wrote:
But it could be elided for the docs.
Robby
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 8:33 AM, J. Ian Johnson <i...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
I imagine that's there more for Typed Racket's sake.
-Ian
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pierpaolo Bernardi" <olopie...@gmail.com>
To: "Neil Toronto" <neil.toro...@gmail.com>
Cc: users@racket-lang.org
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2012 9:17:57 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [racket] Math library ready for testing
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 9:33 PM, Neil Toronto <neil.toro...@gmail.com> wrote:
I've just pushed the last commits that make the new math library ready for
wider testing. Almost everything ready for use is documented, the tests keep
passing, and everything *seems* to work.
(max-math-threads) → Positive-Integer
(max-math-threads num) → void?
num : Positive-Integer
The maximum number of threads a parallelized math function will use.
The default value is (max 1 (processor-count))."
Isn't (max 1 (processor-count)) the same as (processor-count) ?
Or does Racket runs on machines with less than 1 processors? 8^)
____________________
Racket Users list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
____________________
Racket Users list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
____________________
Racket Users list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
____________________
Racket Users list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
