Re: [racket-users] Arbitrary property types on structs?
Got it. I'm actually relieved that this isn't possible, since it means I wasn't simply being dumb. On Wed, Mar 25, 2020, 7:41 PM Sam Phillips wrote: > On 2020-03-25 14:16, David Storrs wrote: > > This would let me use a struct as an output port: > > > > (struct foo (name out) #:property prop:output-port (struct-field-index > out)) > > > > I'd like to be able to set up a struct such that I can use it as a UDP > > socket, something like the following pseudo-code: > > > > (struct foo (socket) #:property prop:udp (struct-field-index socket)) > > > > I see that Racket defines prop:input-port and prop:output-port, but > > there's no prop:udp, nor can I figure out how to do it through the > > structure type properties or generic interfaces. (I feel like I'm > > missing something on those two, so maybe it's just poor understanding.) > > > > Is there a way to do this? > > The way those properties work is that functions that use input-ports and > outputs-ports have knowledge about the properties and check if it is a > struct with those properties. There is no prop:udp though. You could > make one (like the following), but you would need to make your own > wrappers of the existing udp-* functions and have them do the coercion > before passing arguments to the existing racket functions. > > Cheers, > Sam > > --- >8 --- >8 --- > > #lang racket/base > > (require (prefix-in - racket/udp)) > > (define-values (prop:udp prop:udp? udp-socket-ref) >(make-struct-type-property > 'prop:udp > (lambda (val struct-info) > (cond > [(procedure? val) val] > [(exact-nonnegative-integer? val) > ; XXX: check for valid index > (let ([struct-ref (list-ref struct-info 3)]) >(lambda (a-struct-value) > (struct-ref a-struct-value val)))] > > (define (->udp-socket v) >(cond > [(-udp? v) v] > [else > (->udp-socket ((udp-socket-ref v) v))])) > > ;; Something like this for every udp function > (define (udp-bind! socket hostname-string port-no [reuse? #f]) >(-udp-bind! (->udp-socket socket) >hostname-string >port-no >reuse?)) > > (struct server (socket) >#:property >prop:udp (struct-field-index socket) >#:transparent) > > (define (make-server) >(let ([udp (-udp-open-socket)]) > (server udp))) > > -- > 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. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/34622180-8073-1e61-8187-f7d9dc48b236%40gmail.com > . > -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/CAE8gKofUwGm7YexxvLJkMA9gtfRoW_ixr948WNwMShD_0-iA1g%40mail.gmail.com.
Re: [racket-users] Arbitrary property types on structs?
On 2020-03-25 14:16, David Storrs wrote: This would let me use a struct as an output port: (struct foo (name out) #:property prop:output-port (struct-field-index out)) I'd like to be able to set up a struct such that I can use it as a UDP socket, something like the following pseudo-code: (struct foo (socket) #:property prop:udp (struct-field-index socket)) I see that Racket defines prop:input-port and prop:output-port, but there's no prop:udp, nor can I figure out how to do it through the structure type properties or generic interfaces. (I feel like I'm missing something on those two, so maybe it's just poor understanding.) Is there a way to do this? The way those properties work is that functions that use input-ports and outputs-ports have knowledge about the properties and check if it is a struct with those properties. There is no prop:udp though. You could make one (like the following), but you would need to make your own wrappers of the existing udp-* functions and have them do the coercion before passing arguments to the existing racket functions. Cheers, Sam --- >8 --- >8 --- #lang racket/base (require (prefix-in - racket/udp)) (define-values (prop:udp prop:udp? udp-socket-ref) (make-struct-type-property 'prop:udp (lambda (val struct-info) (cond [(procedure? val) val] [(exact-nonnegative-integer? val) ; XXX: check for valid index (let ([struct-ref (list-ref struct-info 3)]) (lambda (a-struct-value) (struct-ref a-struct-value val)))] (define (->udp-socket v) (cond [(-udp? v) v] [else (->udp-socket ((udp-socket-ref v) v))])) ;; Something like this for every udp function (define (udp-bind! socket hostname-string port-no [reuse? #f]) (-udp-bind! (->udp-socket socket) hostname-string port-no reuse?)) (struct server (socket) #:property prop:udp (struct-field-index socket) #:transparent) (define (make-server) (let ([udp (-udp-open-socket)]) (server udp))) -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/34622180-8073-1e61-8187-f7d9dc48b236%40gmail.com.
Re: [racket-users] Separate compilation/caching for Scribble?
We're getting a little far from my real question, since caching the examples is IMHO a hack to cache the most expensive part of the computation, while the whole 'doc ought to be cachable, but I forgot what my own code was doing. That's basically what I'm doing: (define (make-cached-eval name . rest) (define ev (make-log-based-eval (cachefile name) (if (file-exists? (cachefile name)) 'replay 'record))) (for ([r rest]) (ev r)) ev) I'm using with-cache's `cachefile` just to generate and manage the file path, so it ends up in have a good place. I was trying to do something more complex earlier, but it didn't work. On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 09:59:15PM +0100, Ryan Culpepper wrote: > I'm not clear on what `with-cache` is doing in this setup, but it seems > like a potential source of errors. If the goal is to automatically use > `'replay` if the log file exists and `'record` otherwise, why not do the > following? > > (make-log-based-eval the-log-file (if (file-exists? the-log-file) > 'replay 'record)) > > Ryan > > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 8:57 PM William J. Bowman > wrote: > > > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 08:51:18PM +0100, Ryan Culpepper wrote: > > > You can use `raco make` (or `raco setup` for docs of installed packages) > > to > > > compile the Scribble files, but that won't compile the examples. Those > > are > > > dynamically evaluated when the Scribble documents are run. > > Yeah, I was thinking of "compilation" as in caching the output document > > from > > each module. > > > > > For `make-log-based-eval`, are you using a separate evaluator (and > > separate > > > log file) for each Scribble file? > > Yes. However, I'm using `with-cache` and a wrapper to detect whether a > > cache > > file exists (separate cache file each evaluator), and use 'replay mode if > > the > > cache file exists, so I don't have to manually switch to 'replay mode, or > > manually re-record if I alter an example (instead, just clear the cache). > > -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/20200325220252.GA31619%40williamjbowman.com.
[racket-users] Arbitrary property types on structs?
This would let me use a struct as an output port: (struct foo (name out) #:property prop:output-port (struct-field-index out)) I'd like to be able to set up a struct such that I can use it as a UDP socket, something like the following pseudo-code: (struct foo (socket) #:property prop:udp (struct-field-index socket)) I see that Racket defines prop:input-port and prop:output-port, but there's no prop:udp, nor can I figure out how to do it through the structure type properties or generic interfaces. (I feel like I'm missing something on those two, so maybe it's just poor understanding.) Is there a way to do this? -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/CAE8gKoeYqP3TRDHX%3DqLh9GxB6AJ6KF--9g-fVbMQ8c0oFvD_Bw%40mail.gmail.com.
Re: [racket-users] Separate compilation/caching for Scribble?
I'm not clear on what `with-cache` is doing in this setup, but it seems like a potential source of errors. If the goal is to automatically use `'replay` if the log file exists and `'record` otherwise, why not do the following? (make-log-based-eval the-log-file (if (file-exists? the-log-file) 'replay 'record)) Ryan On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 8:57 PM William J. Bowman wrote: > On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 08:51:18PM +0100, Ryan Culpepper wrote: > > You can use `raco make` (or `raco setup` for docs of installed packages) > to > > compile the Scribble files, but that won't compile the examples. Those > are > > dynamically evaluated when the Scribble documents are run. > Yeah, I was thinking of "compilation" as in caching the output document > from > each module. > > > For `make-log-based-eval`, are you using a separate evaluator (and > separate > > log file) for each Scribble file? > Yes. However, I'm using `with-cache` and a wrapper to detect whether a > cache > file exists (separate cache file each evaluator), and use 'replay mode if > the > cache file exists, so I don't have to manually switch to 'replay mode, or > manually re-record if I alter an example (instead, just clear the cache). > -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/CANy33qnePkB3LERw-s8kmGWi4e%2B0T%3D%3D0Tgy%3Da5mHE9odkpFFrQ%40mail.gmail.com.
[racket-users] Switch off type checking via typed/racket/no-check fails on typed big-bang
Hi, I am trying to switch off type checking on a file so that I can prototype faster without the wait for the type checker. However, my code also uses typed/2htdp/universe and typed/2htdp/image, and I get an error on `big-bang`: > Type Checker: Macro big-bang from typed module used in untyped code in: (big-bang ... So, is there a to run the program without running the type checker? Relatedly, is there a way of reloading a *typed* racket file in the REPL (I can't get it to work with ,reload-require which just chokes somehow). I could hack around this by having the big-bang be in an untyped submodule - but doing this only so that I can have a faster developing loop (I will already have to switch between #lang typed/racket and #lang typed/racket/no-check enough) seems a bit dodgy. Cheers, Marc -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/650c64c5-370e-4bc6-855c-5e6745ef53e8%40googlegroups.com.
Re: [racket-users] Separate compilation/caching for Scribble?
On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 08:51:18PM +0100, Ryan Culpepper wrote: > You can use `raco make` (or `raco setup` for docs of installed packages) to > compile the Scribble files, but that won't compile the examples. Those are > dynamically evaluated when the Scribble documents are run. Yeah, I was thinking of "compilation" as in caching the output document from each module. > For `make-log-based-eval`, are you using a separate evaluator (and separate > log file) for each Scribble file? Yes. However, I'm using `with-cache` and a wrapper to detect whether a cache file exists (separate cache file each evaluator), and use 'replay mode if the cache file exists, so I don't have to manually switch to 'replay mode, or manually re-record if I alter an example (instead, just clear the cache). -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/20200325195723.GN26958%40williamjbowman.com.
Re: [racket-users] Separate compilation/caching for Scribble?
You can use `raco make` (or `raco setup` for docs of installed packages) to compile the Scribble files, but that won't compile the examples. Those are dynamically evaluated when the Scribble documents are run. For `make-log-based-eval`, are you using a separate evaluator (and separate log file) for each Scribble file? Ryan On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 7:56 PM William J. Bowman wrote: > Does Scribble support separate compilation or some kind of caching and I'm > just > missing it? > > I'm building a multi-page website using Scribble, with many @examples that > take > a while to run. > If I touch *any page*, all the other pages have to rebuild, re-running the > long > running examples. > > I've hacked up a caching system for examples using make-log-based-eval and > with-cache, but it's completely unreliable, occasionally giving 'could not > replay log' when nothing has changed in that file. > > Am I missing something? > > -- > William J. Bowman > > -- > 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. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/20200325185631.GK26958%40williamjbowman.com > . > -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/CANy33q%3DZ7nfiF%3DqntgSnaD%3D8%2B4L%3DR4CTb73K_T8mzfoXJxXrFQ%40mail.gmail.com.
[racket-users] Separate compilation/caching for Scribble?
Does Scribble support separate compilation or some kind of caching and I'm just missing it? I'm building a multi-page website using Scribble, with many @examples that take a while to run. If I touch *any page*, all the other pages have to rebuild, re-running the long running examples. I've hacked up a caching system for examples using make-log-based-eval and with-cache, but it's completely unreliable, occasionally giving 'could not replay log' when nothing has changed in that file. Am I missing something? -- William J. Bowman -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/20200325185631.GK26958%40williamjbowman.com.
