When I tried to do that to look thru your changes to the framework, I
was overwhelmed with all the reindentation that you did. Is there a
way to avoid seeing that?
Robby
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 8:53 PM, Eli Barzilay e...@barzilay.org wrote:
On Aug 25, Eli Barzilay wrote:
[...] If I touched
I like this. The Stepper becomes available as an aid to help you
answer questions about how things came to be. It is indeed often the
case that I lose the plot when stepping forward and hence go to the
end and work backward; this could put you there right away.
Yes, left-to-right scrolling
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Shriram Krishnamurthi s...@cs.brown.edu
wrote:
Is this a fair, operational restatement of your cautionary note:
It will be much less complicated to add just a `how did I get here?'
button to the REPL and have the rest of the stepper reside in its own
window,
When I'm answering such questions, it is getting extremely difficult
to tell people what to do, and often leads to some confusingly broken
dialog. See for example:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3572450/packaging-system-in-racket
This is mostly a rant since I don't see any easy way to
On Aug 26, Jon Rafkind wrote:
When I'm answering such questions, it is getting extremely difficult
to tell people what to do, and often leads to some confusingly broken
dialog. See for example:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3572450/packaging-system-in-racket
This is mostly a rant
Rename Use the language declared in the source option to Declared
(if first-week CS students don't confuse that with declarative language)?
Automatic or Detected sound a little bit grandiose, but aren't too
bad either.
Ideally, only students ever have to change this setting, or even be told
On 08/26/2010 09:48 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
On Aug 26, Jon Rafkind wrote:
When I'm answering such questions, it is getting extremely difficult
to tell people what to do, and often leads to some confusingly broken
dialog. See for example:
On 08/26/2010 09:33 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
It's getting to be difficult to tell people what to do wrt choosing a
language. There are several things that contribute to this:
* I can't use default language to refer to the module language,
since it's not the default.
* I can't use module
Understood, and agreed. Thanks!
Anyone else have comments/suggestions? I really like Robby's UI
suggestion and am treating it as the lead contender.
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 10:57 AM, Robby Findler
ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu wrote:
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Shriram Krishnamurthi
On Aug 26, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
Rename Use the language declared in the source option to
Declared (if first-week CS students don't confuse that with
declarative language)?
Automatic or Detected sound a little bit grandiose, but aren't
too bad either.
That would be nice, but the problem is
On Aug 26, Robby Findler wrote:
When I tried to do that to look thru your changes to the framework,
I was overwhelmed with all the reindentation that you did. Is there
a way to avoid seeing that?
Yes there is -- the usual two diff flags can be used:
* -b, --ignore-space-change
* -w,
On Aug 26, 2010, at 11:59 AM, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:
Anyone else have comments/suggestions?
Robby's idea of allowing students to choose how a RUN actually worked occurred
to me too but I had a different behavior in mind. Instead of opening a separate
window, I'd much rather see a
I can see how to do what Mattgias is suggesting at the snip level (so
not as bad as I made out) but you won't get nested scroll bars so you
might not like it.
Robby
On Thursday, August 26, 2010, Shriram Krishnamurthi s...@cs.brown.edu wrote:
Understood. But I think this is what Robby is saying
I don't know if anyone cares about this, but I made a reader and #lang
language for the alternate syntax I came up with (direct, obvious
conversion to s-exp but allows writing fewer parens). Implementations
are usually better appreciated than mere proposals. You can get at it
here:
On Aug 26, 2010, at 2:51 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
On Aug 17, Eli Barzilay wrote:
So now I have these counts:
http://tmp.barzilay.org/r1.png 4
http://tmp.barzilay.org/r3.png 1
http://tmp.barzilay.org/r4.png 2
Update on this: the first version (r1 above) was by far the most
On Aug 26, 2010, at 10:59 AM, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:
Got it. Thanks for all the inputs and for the great suggestion!
A couple of comments:
1) I could very well be mis-stating his position, but I think that Guillaume
felt quite strongly that the reductions should occur in the
On 26 Aug 2010, at 11:32:48, John Clements wrote:
3) It's not clear how you want to handle test cases; they don't currently
generate anything in the interactions window, and yet this sounds like the
thing that you're *most* likely to want to be able to step. For the sake of
argument, let
At the moment there is a barn-door sized security hole in DrRacket,
whereby it will take any snip% instance from the user's program and
just display it in the repl. You can exploit this for Good by making
the current-print of your language turn some values into snips (like
images and things).
That seems like the wrong point of integration. If I have
(define v complex expr)
(check-expect (g v) h)
then simply stepping into (g v) may not at all be enough. If the
stepper forced people to rewrite their programs just for steppability,
that should be considered a bad design.
Shriram
Well, that makes sense.
I'm just saying that, in an ideal world, when using the DR, you're
much more writing tests that typing things into the REPL. So it would
be good if the stepper could support that better in some way.
Robby
On Thu, Aug 26, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Shriram Krishnamurthi
On Aug 26, 2010, at 5:23 PM, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:
I know Guillaume proposed to do it in the context of the editor. I'm
unconvinced that that's the right way to go. At any rate, integrating
into an existing bit of infrastructure (def'ns or inter's) is going to
be much more complex
21 matches
Mail list logo
