Re: [racket-users] Macro to extract select subexpressions into other locations
Here's a macro that does something similar:
#lang at-exp racket
(require (for-syntax syntax/parse
racket/contract
))
(begin-for-syntax
(define (get-extracted-exprs-box extracted-exprs-id)
(syntax-local-value extracted-exprs-id))
(define (get-extracted-exprs extracted-exprs-id)
(unbox (get-extracted-exprs-box extracted-exprs-id)))
(define (box-update! b f)
(set-box! b (f (unbox b
(define (add-extracted-expr! extracted-exprs-id new-expr)
(box-update! (get-extracted-exprs-box extracted-exprs-id)
(λ (lst) (append lst (list (syntax-local-introduce
new-expr)))
(define-syntax extract-expression
(syntax-parser
[(extract-expression expr:expr extracted-exprs-id:id)
(add-extracted-expr! #'extracted-exprs-id #'expr)
#'expr]))
(define-syntax with-extract-expressions
(syntax-parser
[(with-extract-expressions stx-expr:expr ...)
#:with [extracted-exprs macro-id:id ...]
(generate-temporaries #'[extracted-expressions stx-expr ...])
#'(begin
(define-syntax extracted-exprs (box '()))
(begin
(define-syntax macro-id
(lambda (stx)
(stx-expr #'extracted-exprs)))
(macro-id))
...)]))
(define (square x) (* x x))
(with-extract-expressions
(lambda (exprs)
(with-syntax ([exprs exprs])
#'(module+ test
(require rackunit)
(check-equal? (extract-expression (square 5) exprs) 25)
(check-equal? (extract-expression (square -5) exprs) 25
(lambda (exprs)
(with-syntax ([(expr ...) (get-extracted-exprs exprs)])
#'(module+ doc
(require scribble/manual
scribble/eval)
(define evaluator (make-base-eval))
@defproc[(square [x real?]) real?]{
Returns the square of @racket[x], the result of
multiplying @racket[x] by itself.
@examples[#:eval evaluator expr ...]}
On Jul 20, 2015, at 8:03 PM, Jack Firth jackhfi...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm trying to create a way to automatically turn test cases into examples.
I'd like a macro that turns this:
(extract-expressions
(module+ test
(check-equal? (extract-expression (square 5)) 25)
(check-equal? (extract-expression (square -5)) 25))
(module+ doc
@defproc[(square [x real?]) real?]{
Returns the square of @racket[x], the result of
multiplying @racket[x] by itself.
@examples[#:eval evaluator (include-extracted-expressions)]}))
into this:
(begin
(module+ test
(check-equal? (square 5) 25))
(module+ doc
@defproc[(square [x real?]) real?]{
Returns the square of @racket[x], the result of
multiplying @racket[x] by itself.
@examples[#:eval evaluator (square 5) (square -5)]}))
That's the general idea anyway. I want to be able to gather arbitrary
expressions inside a region and copy them into some other marked place
inside the expressions. How exactly do I go about doing this, and how should
I do it properly?
--
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://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
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://groups.google.com/d/optout.
[racket-users] About redrawing buttons on-demand in gui framework
Hi, everyone. I've stumbled upon some unforeseen strangeness regarding the redrawing of certain elements in the GUI framework recently. Initially, I assumed that a set-label call for a button, for example, would redraw that button automatically, with the new dimensions and everything in mind. When that wasn't the case, I looked for ways to force a redraw of the button, but the only things I could find were reflow-container and the associated methods. They only seem to apply to containers, however, and won't actually redraw the buttons in those containers. The ugly hack that I had to settle on in lieu of finding a better choice is to just recreate the buttons on demand, but this brought a lot of baggage in terms of having to make sure all references still point to the button, etc., so I would've liked to have a version that simply redraws the exact same object with another label. Any help is appreciated, as I'd like to avoid these changes becoming too ingrained in my code. // Rickard Andersson -- 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://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [racket-users] Macro introduce identifiers in the new expander
That fixed the example I gave, but now this fails: (let () (def) (let () (use))) On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 2:50 PM Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu wrote: Repair pushed. On Jul 20, 2015, at 11:14 AM, Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu wrote: Thanks for the info. I think it's a bug in the expander, and I have a repair, but I think that repair might point to another bug that I'm still investigating. At Mon, 20 Jul 2015 12:56:49 -0400, Alexander D. Knauth wrote: I don't really know what's going on, but this might help: ;; It seems to be introducing the definition correctly, but not the use: ;; this works (let () (def) ; no difference between (def) and (define id 5) id) ;; this doesn't (let () (def) (use)) ; but there is a difference between (use) and id ;; and this doesn't either (let () (define id 5) (use)) On Jul 20, 2015, at 12:35 PM, Spencer Florence spen...@florence.io wrote: Hello, I'm trying to update some code to the new expander. The below code works on 6.2 but fails on the new expander with an unbound identifier error. #lang racket (require (for-syntax syntax/parse)) ;; a standard context for identifiers (define-for-syntax ctx #'ctx) ;; create an ID with the context `ctx`, and the current ;; expander mark (so that the mark is canceled later), ;; and the location loc (define-for-syntax (make-id loc) (syntax-local-introduce (datum-syntax ctx 'id loc))) ;; This introduces a binding (define-syntax (def stx) (syntax-parse stx [(def) (with-syntax ([id (make-id #'here)]) #'(define id 5))])) ;; this attempts to use the binding introduced by `def` (define-syntax (use stx) (syntax-parse stx [(use) (with-syntax ([id (make-id #'here)]) #'id)])) ;; this works #; (begin (def) (use)) ;; this fails (let () (def) (use)) -- 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://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [racket-users] Macro to extract select subexpressions into other locations
Oh. I checked that that the expressions were accumulating in the definition of
extract-expression, but I didn't check that it expanded in the right order to
do what you want.
So this doesn't actually work.
On Jul 21, 2015, at 3:08 PM, Alexander D. Knauth alexan...@knauth.org wrote:
Here's a macro that does something similar:
#lang at-exp racket
(require (for-syntax syntax/parse
racket/contract
))
(begin-for-syntax
(define (get-extracted-exprs-box extracted-exprs-id)
(syntax-local-value extracted-exprs-id))
(define (get-extracted-exprs extracted-exprs-id)
(unbox (get-extracted-exprs-box extracted-exprs-id)))
(define (box-update! b f)
(set-box! b (f (unbox b
(define (add-extracted-expr! extracted-exprs-id new-expr)
(box-update! (get-extracted-exprs-box extracted-exprs-id)
(λ (lst) (append lst (list (syntax-local-introduce
new-expr)))
(define-syntax extract-expression
(syntax-parser
[(extract-expression expr:expr extracted-exprs-id:id)
(add-extracted-expr! #'extracted-exprs-id #'expr)
#'expr]))
(define-syntax with-extract-expressions
(syntax-parser
[(with-extract-expressions stx-expr:expr ...)
#:with [extracted-exprs macro-id:id ...]
(generate-temporaries #'[extracted-expressions stx-expr ...])
#'(begin
(define-syntax extracted-exprs (box '()))
(begin
(define-syntax macro-id
(lambda (stx)
(stx-expr #'extracted-exprs)))
(macro-id))
...)]))
(define (square x) (* x x))
(with-extract-expressions
(lambda (exprs)
(with-syntax ([exprs exprs])
#'(module+ test
(require rackunit)
(check-equal? (extract-expression (square 5) exprs) 25)
(check-equal? (extract-expression (square -5) exprs) 25
(lambda (exprs)
(with-syntax ([(expr ...) (get-extracted-exprs exprs)])
#'(module+ doc
(require scribble/manual
scribble/eval)
(define evaluator (make-base-eval))
@defproc[(square [x real?]) real?]{
Returns the square of @racket[x], the result of
multiplying @racket[x] by itself.
@examples[#:eval evaluator expr ...]}
On Jul 20, 2015, at 8:03 PM, Jack Firth jackhfi...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm trying to create a way to automatically turn test cases into examples.
I'd like a macro that turns this:
(extract-expressions
(module+ test
(check-equal? (extract-expression (square 5)) 25)
(check-equal? (extract-expression (square -5)) 25))
(module+ doc
@defproc[(square [x real?]) real?]{
Returns the square of @racket[x], the result of
multiplying @racket[x] by itself.
@examples[#:eval evaluator (include-extracted-expressions)]}))
into this:
(begin
(module+ test
(check-equal? (square 5) 25))
(module+ doc
@defproc[(square [x real?]) real?]{
Returns the square of @racket[x], the result of
multiplying @racket[x] by itself.
@examples[#:eval evaluator (square 5) (square -5)]}))
That's the general idea anyway. I want to be able to gather arbitrary
expressions inside a region and copy them into some other marked place
inside the expressions. How exactly do I go about doing this, and how should
I do it properly?
--
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://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
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://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
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://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [racket-users] Re: How to draw a 3D ball?
Le 20/07/2015 11:03, Mianlai Zhou a écrit : Hi, Thanks for your answer. I meant the former, i.e., a 2D pict of a ball with some shading to make it look 3D. Is there any quick way to do it or I have to implement the algorithm by myself? The answer is more general than just in the context of Racket... Do you want something of this kind (sorry for the quality, it was just a 30 second test, it could be better). The algorithm is just a radial gradient, and a clipping circle. Its 'softness' translates visually into the amount of specularity, or the roughness, if you prefer. Some exquisite parametrization may be found anywhere, e. g. here (a page on SVG): http://doc.qt.io/qt-5/qtsvg-svgviewer-files-spheres-svg.html which gives: See also the book Flash 3D Cheats Most Wanted by Yard, Balkan, et al. Now, the Racket solution ... You will find the information about radial gradients (with examples) here, in your local doc: ... /doc/draw/radial-gradient_.html?q=gradient#%28tech._radial._gradient%29 On line: http://docs.racket-lang.org/draw/radial-gradient_.html#%28tech._radial._gradient%29 To have something more realistic, you should combine (at least) the diffuse and specular lighting, which is non-linear. Quite easy, and implemented in the 3D simulation in SVG, and several drawing packages, but all depends on your ambitions. For simple drawings, a quite trivial CSS suffices, there is a radial gradient in the standard, and multiple colour stops are possible. http://www.w3schools.com/css/css3_gradients.asp Best regards Jerzy Karczmarczuk /Caen, France/ -- 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://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [racket-users] Macro to extract select subexpressions into other locations
Why not step back and design a notation where testing and documenting can share
concepts instead of retro-actively extracting expressions from one place to put
somewhere else. -- Matthias
On Jul 21, 2015, at 3:23 PM, Alexander D. Knauth alexan...@knauth.org wrote:
Oh. I checked that that the expressions were accumulating in the definition
of extract-expression, but I didn't check that it expanded in the right order
to do what you want.
So this doesn't actually work.
On Jul 21, 2015, at 3:08 PM, Alexander D. Knauth alexan...@knauth.org wrote:
Here's a macro that does something similar:
#lang at-exp racket
(require (for-syntax syntax/parse
racket/contract
))
(begin-for-syntax
(define (get-extracted-exprs-box extracted-exprs-id)
(syntax-local-value extracted-exprs-id))
(define (get-extracted-exprs extracted-exprs-id)
(unbox (get-extracted-exprs-box extracted-exprs-id)))
(define (box-update! b f)
(set-box! b (f (unbox b
(define (add-extracted-expr! extracted-exprs-id new-expr)
(box-update! (get-extracted-exprs-box extracted-exprs-id)
(λ (lst) (append lst (list (syntax-local-introduce
new-expr)))
(define-syntax extract-expression
(syntax-parser
[(extract-expression expr:expr extracted-exprs-id:id)
(add-extracted-expr! #'extracted-exprs-id #'expr)
#'expr]))
(define-syntax with-extract-expressions
(syntax-parser
[(with-extract-expressions stx-expr:expr ...)
#:with [extracted-exprs macro-id:id ...]
(generate-temporaries #'[extracted-expressions stx-expr ...])
#'(begin
(define-syntax extracted-exprs (box '()))
(begin
(define-syntax macro-id
(lambda (stx)
(stx-expr #'extracted-exprs)))
(macro-id))
...)]))
(define (square x) (* x x))
(with-extract-expressions
(lambda (exprs)
(with-syntax ([exprs exprs])
#'(module+ test
(require rackunit)
(check-equal? (extract-expression (square 5) exprs) 25)
(check-equal? (extract-expression (square -5) exprs) 25
(lambda (exprs)
(with-syntax ([(expr ...) (get-extracted-exprs exprs)])
#'(module+ doc
(require scribble/manual
scribble/eval)
(define evaluator (make-base-eval))
@defproc[(square [x real?]) real?]{
Returns the square of @racket[x], the result of
multiplying @racket[x] by itself.
@examples[#:eval evaluator expr ...]}
On Jul 20, 2015, at 8:03 PM, Jack Firth jackhfi...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm trying to create a way to automatically turn test cases into examples.
I'd like a macro that turns this:
(extract-expressions
(module+ test
(check-equal? (extract-expression (square 5)) 25)
(check-equal? (extract-expression (square -5)) 25))
(module+ doc
@defproc[(square [x real?]) real?]{
Returns the square of @racket[x], the result of
multiplying @racket[x] by itself.
@examples[#:eval evaluator (include-extracted-expressions)]}))
into this:
(begin
(module+ test
(check-equal? (square 5) 25))
(module+ doc
@defproc[(square [x real?]) real?]{
Returns the square of @racket[x], the result of
multiplying @racket[x] by itself.
@examples[#:eval evaluator (square 5) (square -5)]}))
That's the general idea anyway. I want to be able to gather arbitrary
expressions inside a region and copy them into some other marked place
inside the expressions. How exactly do I go about doing this, and how
should I do it properly?
--
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://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
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://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
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://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
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://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Re: [racket-users] Macro introduce identifiers in the new expander
That one should fail (and the same as with the old expander). Each `(let () )` starts a new scope, and the identifier introduced by `(use)` doesn't have the scope for the outer `(let () )` where `(def)` creates a binding. At Tue, 21 Jul 2015 19:38:57 +, Spencer Florence wrote: That fixed the example I gave, but now this fails: (let () (def) (let () (use))) On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 2:50 PM Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu wrote: Repair pushed. On Jul 20, 2015, at 11:14 AM, Matthew Flatt mfl...@cs.utah.edu wrote: Thanks for the info. I think it's a bug in the expander, and I have a repair, but I think that repair might point to another bug that I'm still investigating. At Mon, 20 Jul 2015 12:56:49 -0400, Alexander D. Knauth wrote: I don't really know what's going on, but this might help: ;; It seems to be introducing the definition correctly, but not the use: ;; this works (let () (def) ; no difference between (def) and (define id 5) id) ;; this doesn't (let () (def) (use)) ; but there is a difference between (use) and id ;; and this doesn't either (let () (define id 5) (use)) On Jul 20, 2015, at 12:35 PM, Spencer Florence spen...@florence.io wrote: Hello, I'm trying to update some code to the new expander. The below code works on 6.2 but fails on the new expander with an unbound identifier error. #lang racket (require (for-syntax syntax/parse)) ;; a standard context for identifiers (define-for-syntax ctx #'ctx) ;; create an ID with the context `ctx`, and the current ;; expander mark (so that the mark is canceled later), ;; and the location loc (define-for-syntax (make-id loc) (syntax-local-introduce (datum-syntax ctx 'id loc))) ;; This introduces a binding (define-syntax (def stx) (syntax-parse stx [(def) (with-syntax ([id (make-id #'here)]) #'(define id 5))])) ;; this attempts to use the binding introduced by `def` (define-syntax (use stx) (syntax-parse stx [(use) (with-syntax ([id (make-id #'here)]) #'id)])) ;; this works #; (begin (def) (use)) ;; this fails (let () (def) (use)) -- 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://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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://groups.google.com/d/optout.
