Re: [racket-users] Re: Is this "inside out" macro technique common?

[Ryan Kramer]

Thank you! `splice` is indeed the essential primitive here, so it's nice to 
see it extracted and named properly.

The difference between eval-syntax and syntax-local-eval is good to know 
also. I think there is a bug in the documentation (or maybe in Racket) 
because when I try `(syntax-local-eval #'(begin e ...) #f)` I get 

..\..\Program Files\Racket-8.0.0.11\collects\racket\syntax.rkt:234:0: 
syntax-local-bind-syntaxes: contract violation
  expected: (or/c internal-definition-context? (listof 
internal-definition-context?))
  given: #f

No big deal, the empty list works, but the documentation says #f should be 
accepted too.

> Without the whole picture of the problem you're trying to solve, it's 
hard to evaluate how splices compare to those alternatives, though. 

When choosing how to implement a macro, my first thought is "can I make 
define-syntax-rule work?" And if the answer is yes, then I use it -- I 
won't need the documentation and probably won't make a mistake. On the 
other end of the spectrum is syntax-parse which is way more powerful, but I 
will certainly need the documentation and mistakes are more likely. When I 
stumbled upon my splice variant, it seemed to be only slightly more complex 
than define-syntax-rule while enabling a much wider range of usage 
patterns. Or so I thought at the time, but now I'm less sure. I'll have to 
see how it plays out.
On Monday, August 16, 2021 at 12:22:02 PM UTC-5 Michael Ballantyne wrote:

> The essential primitive here seems to me to be:
>
> (define-syntax (splice stx)
>   (syntax-case stx ()
> [(_ e ...)
>  (eval-syntax #'(begin e ...))]))
>
> With with-quasisyntax being:
>
> (define-syntax-rule
>   (with-quasisyntax ([a b] ...) template)
>   (splice (with-syntax ([a b] ...) (quasisyntax template
>
> Forms like splice appear in the metaprogramming systems of other 
> programming languages such as Template Haskell (
> https://downloads.haskell.org/~ghc/latest/docs/html/users_guide/exts/template_haskell.html)
>  
> and Converge (https://convergepl.org/) but I haven't seen the pattern 
> widely used in Racket.
>
> I think this comes from a different philosophy. Systems like Template 
> Haskell think of metaprogramming as a way to automatically generate code. 
> From "Template Meta-programming for Haskell" (
> https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/meta-haskell.pdf
> ):
>   The purpose of the extension is to allow programmers to compute some 
> parts of their program
>rather than write them, and to do so seamlessly and conveniently
> In Racket we generally think instead about creating either language 
> extensions or new sub-languages. Code generation happens to be the way we 
> implement the extensions or sub-languages, but the focus is on the new 
> syntax we are defining. If we find repeated patterns of code we start by 
> thinking about the language or language feature we wish was there, and then 
> implement that. Within those implementations we use abstractions like 
> syntax-parse, syntax classes, and syntax-parse template metafunctions.
>
> Without the whole picture of the problem you're trying to solve, it's hard 
> to evaluate how splices compare to those alternatives, though.
>
> That said, here are two alternative implementations of splice:
>
> (define-syntax (splice2 stx)
>   (syntax-case stx ()
> [(_ e ...)
>  #`(let-syntax ([m (lambda (stx) e ...)]) (m))]))
>
> (require (for-syntax racket/syntax))
> (define-syntax (splice3 stx)
>   (syntax-case stx ()
> [(_ e ...)
>  (syntax-local-eval #'(begin e ...))]))
>
> Whereas eval-syntax only allows access to the module-level expander 
> environment, these can access the local environment. That might matter if 
> you need to use syntax-local-value to access information from syntax 
> bindings. The following works with splice2 and splice3, but not splice:
>
> (let-syntax ([x 'foo])
>   (splice3
>(displayln (syntax-local-value #'x))
>#'(void)))
>
> I recommend using splice3 because it avoids the intermediate expansion 
> step of the let-syntax .
> On Friday, August 13, 2021 at 9:19:51 PM UTC-4 Ryan Kramer wrote:
>
>> The name `with-quasisyntax` is not very good, because it is not simply a 
>> quasi version of `with-syntax`. The most interesting part is that it calls 
>> `eval-syntax` up front. The result feels like a "universal macro" -- it can 
>> be used to implement both foo->assoc and assoc->foo which look like they 
>> would traditionally need separate macros (or one large macro that handles 
>> both).
>>
>> I am noticing that this use of `eval-syntax` can cause error messages to 
>> be less good, but I still think it's OK for "private" code.
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 2:45 PM D. Ben Knoble  wrote:
>>
>>> Ah, I'm now seeing that with-quasi implicitly #`s the body; I believe 
>>> with syntax-parse, #:with, and #' + template vars + #` when needed you 
>>> might be ok.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> You received this message because 

Re: [racket-users] Doc pages search engine difficulties

[Dexter Lagan]

  Thank you very much for the thorough explanation. It makes sense. I’ll be 
sharing the cheat sheet with my coworkers. It sure is a good starting point.

Dex

> On Aug 17, 2021, at 9:40 PM, Jens Axel Søgaard  wrote:
> 
> 
>> Den tir. 17. aug. 2021 kl. 16.34 skrev Dexter Lagan :
> 
>> Hello there,
>> 
>>   I'm trying to teach one of my coworkers how to search for function names 
>> in the Racket manual, and I'm having serious problems finding very simple 
>> things, such as the function to display the file browser dialog (get-file). 
>> I know most function names by heart but my coworker isn't that fortunate. I 
>> see I'm not the only one, as per these Stack Overflow answers.
>> 
>>   Does anybody know why the search engine doesn't seem to index page 
>> contents other than exact function names and titles?
>> 
>>   I understand search engines aren't trivial matters, but I'm thinking that 
>> finding very basic Racket functions would be crucial for beginners. If 
>> somebody could point me to the search engine repo, I'd love to have a look.
> 
> Full text search is possible to add - but it would require some changes to 
> the current setup.
> 
> One goal of the documentation system is that you can use the documentation on 
> your own computer without any internet access.
> When you enter a search term, a piece of JavaScript runs directly on your 
> computer without any queries sent to a server.
> In order for this to work there needs to be a prebuilt index in which the 
> search term an be looked up. 
> This index is built by `raco setup`. For each function/macro definition in 
> the documentation an entry is added to the index
> with associated information (which module is defined in etc.). 
> 
> If you use the search page at docs.racket-lang.org the index will be 
> downloaded to your computer first.
> Currently the index (the file name is plt-index.js )  has a size around 12 
> MB. 
> 
> If full text search is to be added the index would be considerably larger - 
> which means the index can no longer
> be downloaded. The actual search then needs to take place on the web-server. 
> 
> Could a standard full text indexer be used? Maybe - but most likely it will 
> be necessary to build a custom one.
> Standard indexers stem words ("apple" and "apples" are indexed as the same 
> word). They also filter out
> punctuation such as  - . ? / etc. This in turn makes it difficult to search 
> for identifiers.
> 
> The compromise today is that we have precise search among the identifiers and 
> keywords marked as
> imported by the documentation writers. If full text search is needed, then 
> Google is the place to look.
> 
> Back in the day before the current documentation search - it was possible to 
> make a custom Google 
> backed search page that only indexed a certain set of sites. It worked 
> "okay", but not great.
> The current system works much better.
> 
> That said, I understand that the amount of documentation has grown to such a 
> size, that it can 
> be difficult for newcomers to navigate. Maybe "cheat sheets" such as 
> 
>  https://docs.racket-lang.org/racket-cheat/index.html
> 
> could be added to some sections in order to give an overview of what's 
> available?
> 
> /Jens Axel
> 

-- 
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/6DFD2012-B618-4329-9E6B-7F171B0C6B89%40gmail.com.

Re: [racket-users] Doc pages search engine difficulties

[Jens Axel Søgaard]

Den tir. 17. aug. 2021 kl. 16.34 skrev Dexter Lagan :

> Hello there,
>
>   I'm trying to teach one of my coworkers how to search for function names
> in the Racket manual, and I'm having serious problems finding very simple
> things, such as the function to display the file browser dialog (get-file).
> I know most function names by heart but my coworker isn't that fortunate. I
> see I'm not the only one, as per these
> 
> Stack Overflow answers.
>
>   Does anybody know why the search engine doesn't seem to index page
> contents other than exact function names and titles?
>
>   I understand search engines aren't trivial matters, but I'm thinking
> that finding very basic Racket functions would be crucial for beginners. If
> somebody could point me to the search engine repo, I'd love to have a look.
>

Full text search is possible to add - but it would require some changes to
the current setup.

One goal of the documentation system is that you can use the documentation
on your own computer without any internet access.
When you enter a search term, a piece of JavaScript runs directly on your
computer without any queries sent to a server.
In order for this to work there needs to be a prebuilt index in which the
search term an be looked up.
This index is built by `raco setup`. For each function/macro definition in
the documentation an entry is added to the index
with associated information (which module is defined in etc.).

If you use the search page at docs.racket-lang.org the index will be
downloaded to your computer first.
Currently the index (the file name is plt-index.js )  has a size around 12
MB.

If full text search is to be added the index would be considerably larger -
which means the index can no longer
be downloaded. The actual search then needs to take place on the
web-server.

Could a standard full text indexer be used? Maybe - but most likely it will
be necessary to build a custom one.
Standard indexers stem words ("apple" and "apples" are indexed as the same
word). They also filter out
punctuation such as  - . ? / etc. This in turn makes it difficult to search
for identifiers.

The compromise today is that we have precise search among the identifiers
and keywords marked as
imported by the documentation writers. If full text search is needed, then
Google is the place to look.

Back in the day before the current documentation search - it was possible
to make a custom Google
backed search page that only indexed a certain set of sites. It worked
"okay", but not great.
The current system works much better.

That said, I understand that the amount of documentation has grown to such
a size, that it can
be difficult for newcomers to navigate. Maybe "cheat sheets" such as

 https://docs.racket-lang.org/racket-cheat/index.html

could be added to some sections in order to give an overview of what's
available?

/Jens Axel

-- 
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/CABefVgx8QVfVs9shP-OXBF9ojLNqAeLGCvpeHq0Z3i%2Be0k_vwg%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [racket-users] Doc pages search engine difficulties

[Sorawee Porncharoenwase]

But content search is also unsatisfactory in many situations. As an
example, take a look at Python’s documentation, which has the content
search. I searched for “list” (
https://docs.python.org/3/search.html?q=list&check_keywords=yes&area=default),
hoping to find the documentation for the list function, and the result that
I wanted is the 20th one. Earlier search results include the readline
library, because it contains the content “the history *list*”, and a code
example “reprlib.repr(set(‘supercalifragi*list*icexpialidocious’))”. This
problem virtually doesn’t exist with the indexed term search in Racket.

I'm not saying that there’s nothing to improve. I think making it possible
to do a content search, perhaps via a query like content:"file browser
dialog", might be a good idea. But I definitely think we should not take
the current search functionality away.




On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 8:52 AM Dexter Lagan  wrote:

>   True, I’m forced to do this when the search won’t do. It’s too bad the
> default search doesn’t work as well. Would it be shameful to use Google as
> the main search engine, as many others do? I’m sure most wouldn’t
> appreciate having to depend on Google for this. I’ll look at the code just
> so I understand.
>
> Dex
>
> On Aug 17, 2021, at 5:27 PM, Sorawee Porncharoenwase <
> sorawee.pw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 
>
> FWIW, you can use Google to do that. The search query
>
> site:docs.racket-lang.org file browser dialog
>
> shows https://docs.racket-lang.org/mrlib/Path_Dialog.html as the first
> search result. The page also has a link to get-file and put-file.
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 7:34 AM Dexter Lagan 
> wrote:
>
>> Hello there,
>>
>>   I'm trying to teach one of my coworkers how to search for function
>> names in the Racket manual, and I'm having serious problems finding very
>> simple things, such as the function to display the file browser dialog
>> (get-file). I know most function names by heart but my coworker isn't that
>> fortunate. I see I'm not the only one, as per these
>> 
>> Stack Overflow answers.
>>
>>   Does anybody know why the search engine doesn't seem to index page
>> contents other than exact function names and titles?
>>
>>   I understand search engines aren't trivial matters, but I'm thinking
>> that finding very basic Racket functions would be crucial for beginners. If
>> somebody could point me to the search engine repo, I'd love to have a look.
>>
>> Thanks in advance!
>>
>> Dexter
>>
>> --
>> 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/377da13a-dafe-4558-b21c-f71cd8238a93n%40googlegroups.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/CADcuegt66-e5LY4r95eH0S3_OukcN0i1VDFuJiskCNd1retuhw%40mail.gmail.com.

Re: [racket-users] Doc pages search engine difficulties

[Sorawee Porncharoenwase]

FWIW, you can use Google to do that. The search query

site:docs.racket-lang.org file browser dialog

shows https://docs.racket-lang.org/mrlib/Path_Dialog.html as the first
search result. The page also has a link to get-file and put-file.


On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 7:34 AM Dexter Lagan  wrote:

> Hello there,
>
>   I'm trying to teach one of my coworkers how to search for function names
> in the Racket manual, and I'm having serious problems finding very simple
> things, such as the function to display the file browser dialog (get-file).
> I know most function names by heart but my coworker isn't that fortunate. I
> see I'm not the only one, as per these
> 
> Stack Overflow answers.
>
>   Does anybody know why the search engine doesn't seem to index page
> contents other than exact function names and titles?
>
>   I understand search engines aren't trivial matters, but I'm thinking
> that finding very basic Racket functions would be crucial for beginners. If
> somebody could point me to the search engine repo, I'd love to have a look.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Dexter
>
> --
> 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/377da13a-dafe-4558-b21c-f71cd8238a93n%40googlegroups.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/CADcuegvZnhqO4_Mqi9sVSPkegJ6LAnGOO%3D%3DRSkE80eS7MWO_LA%40mail.gmail.com.

[racket-users] Doc pages search engine difficulties

[Dexter Lagan]

Hello there,

  I'm trying to teach one of my coworkers how to search for function names 
in the Racket manual, and I'm having serious problems finding very simple 
things, such as the function to display the file browser dialog (get-file). 
I know most function names by heart but my coworker isn't that fortunate. I 
see I'm not the only one, as per these 

 
Stack Overflow answers.

  Does anybody know why the search engine doesn't seem to index page 
contents other than exact function names and titles?

  I understand search engines aren't trivial matters, but I'm thinking that 
finding very basic Racket functions would be crucial for beginners. If 
somebody could point me to the search engine repo, I'd love to have a look.

Thanks in advance!

Dexter

-- 
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/377da13a-dafe-4558-b21c-f71cd8238a93n%40googlegroups.com.

[racket-users] Racket News - Issue 53

[Paulo Matos]

Hi all,

Here's another Racket News Issue... Counting 53 now! :)
Enjoy!

https://racket-news.com/2021/08/racket-news-issue-53.html

Paulo Matos

-- 
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/11cb5e1d-c8a1-4705-b0cb-cdf6e4beb71en%40googlegroups.com.