Attached are two screenshots of part of a model I've extracted from Redex.
The first is after changing the default fonts. As you can see, there is a *lot*
of vertical whitespace
around each judgment form clause and where clause. In particular, the top of
the bounding box seems
too high.
The sec
I'd like to add that the 32bit version of Racket 6.5 works fine and displays
actual numbers. It seems that this would be a bug in the 64 bit version?
Alex.
On Thursday, June 2, 2016 at 8:24:42 PM UTC+8, Alex Harsanyi wrote:
> I'm trying to use dump-memory-stats to find out where my application
Erm, set-box! not box-set! My bad.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://gro
#%top provides fallback behavior at compile time, but only in expression
positions. I think what you want can be done by doing this:
- Under the hood, make variables immutable and have their values be boxes.
- Have (set! x:id expr) and (define x:id expr) both expand to (box-set! x
expr). This is
On Jun 2, 2016, at 10:39 AM, Jack Firth wrote:
>
> I think you can do this by having your language provide it's own #%top syntax
> that defines what to do with unknown variables.
IIUC `#%top` can only provide fallback behavior at runtime, right? AFAICT it
doesn't help with definitions missin
On Thursday, June 2, 2016 at 10:06:25 AM UTC-7, Matthew Butterick wrote:
> I have a solution to this problem — is it legit, or is there some slick
> Rackety technique I'm missing?
>
> I'm making a toy #lang interpreter for Basic, which allows variables to be
> created with an assignment statemen
I have a solution to this problem — is it legit, or is there some slick Rackety
technique I'm missing?
I'm making a toy #lang interpreter for Basic, which allows variables to be
created with an assignment statement (like Python). The wrinkle in Basic is
that the execution order of the lines isn
> On the other hand, it would be a real stress test. So if you’re up to
> it, try to use the binding mechanism and post on the list how you’re
> doing. — Matthias
That's my plan as soon as I finish reading SEwPR. I'll let you know how
it goes.
Thanks a lot to you all for all the kind advice.
Bes
On the other hand, it would be a real stress test. So if you’re up to it, try
to use the binding mechanism and post on the list how you’re doing. — Matthias
> On Jun 2, 2016, at 7:49 AM, Robby Findler wrote:
>
> It is designed for lexical scope, yes. If you have a language with
> it's own i
I'm trying to use dump-memory-stats to find out where my application uses its
memory, unfortunately, it does not seem to print out any usefull info. When
calling it with no arguments I get the value "???64d" for everything:
Begin Dump
Begin Racket3m
:???64d???64d
:
Asumu Takikawa writes:
> One thing that's not portable is the fonts that you use. You will
> probably have to install the same fonts or ensure that you only
> use fonts that are available on both machines.
Hmm…that might be problematic considering I do not have any clue which
fonts are on ’prese
Matthias Felleisen
writes:
>> is it safe to prepare it on Linux and ’execute’ under Linux
>> by putting the whole environment on USB stick?
>
>
> Yes.
Ahh, I wanted to ask "to prepare under Linux" and "execute under
Windows". :-(
> (I have no experience w/ non-technical presentations.)
OK.
It is designed for lexical scope, yes. If you have a language with
it's own interesting, non-standard notion of scope, you will probably
have to (and, indeed, want to) model it explicitly.
Robby
On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 5:59 AM, Leandro Facchinetti wrote:
>> Woah, cool!
>>
>> Since the book was w
> Woah, cool!
>
> Since the book was written, we have added support for binding
> specifications to Redex. It's documentation is still in the process of
> being improved, but you might have some interest in checking it out
> (it is the part after #:binding-forms).
I read the documentation and this
14 matches
Mail list logo