Re: [racket-dev] Fwd: [shootout-Feature Requests][312552] Scheme PLT should be renamed to Racket

2010-06-18 Thread Vincent St-Amour
At Fri, 18 Jun 2010 08:38:24 -0500, Robby Findler wrote: We're talking about this code, right? http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u32/program.php?test=mandelbrotlang=racketid=2 It is already unsafe, I think? No, it uses fl+ and friends. An unsafe version would use unsafe-fl+ instead.

Re: [racket-dev] Fwd: [shootout-Feature Requests][312552] Scheme PLT should be renamed to Racket

2010-06-18 Thread Vincent St-Amour
At Fri, 18 Jun 2010 14:52:30 +0100, Paulo J. Matos wrote: I've been working on typed versions of these benchmarks, and some are faster than the untyped versions (including the mandelbrot benchmark, whose typed version is ~30% faster and does not show the random behavior discussed above).

[racket-dev] Fwd: [shootout-Feature Requests][312552] Scheme PLT should be renamed to Racket

2010-06-18 Thread Robby Findler
I think you missed the require line. It is using unsafe-fl+ for example. Robby On Friday, June 18, 2010, Vincent St-Amour stamo...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: At Fri, 18 Jun 2010 08:38:24 -0500, Robby Findler wrote: We're talking about this code, right?

Re: [racket-dev] Fwd: [shootout-Feature Requests][312552] Scheme PLT should be renamed to Racket

2010-06-18 Thread Vincent St-Amour
At Fri, 18 Jun 2010 10:05:57 -0500, Robby Findler wrote: Perhaps it suggests a bug in the interaction between that fancy require operator and the optimizer? Actually, the benchmark on the shootout webpage is named mandelbrot-unsafe.rkt in the repository. The version I had in mind is

Re: [racket-dev] Fwd: [shootout-Feature Requests][312552] Scheme PLT should be renamed to Racket

2010-06-18 Thread Robby Findler
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Vincent St-Amour stamo...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: The slowdown observed on the shootout webpage, since it's based on mandelbrot-unsafe.rkt, could thus be caused by the upgrade to 5.0. I'm not sure where to get the mandlebrot-unsafe.rkt that was distributed with

[racket-dev] make xml structs transparent?

2010-06-18 Thread John Clements
Is there some good reason why the 'document' and 'prolog' structures in the xml library are not transparent? In the just trying to see what's there stage of programming, it would be a lot simpler not to have to dig through them with explicit accessors. John smime.p7s Description: S/MIME