Hi Harry,
This would be a nice feature indeed.
Note that you can use code folding for that purpose, but I personally don't
like it because it makes the saved source code non-textual.
One related proposal that I made earlier is to have a multi-view document,
where you could select Source, Source
My papers have been using record notation. Say for lookup:
s{C = x, E = rho} -- s[C := v, E := rho_0] where rho(x) = (v rho_0)
Is this not good enough?
-Ian
- Original Message -
From: Robby Findler ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu
To: J. Ian Johnson i...@ccs.neu.edu
Cc: dev dev@racket-lang.org,
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 7:48 AM, J. Ian Johnson i...@ccs.neu.edu wrote:
My papers have been using record notation. Say for lookup:
s{C = x, E = rho} -- s[C := v, E := rho_0] where rho(x) = (v rho_0)
Can you explain this line in a little more detail?
Is this not good enough?
I don't think I
That line is how I would render the lookup rule for the CEK machine (in the
below example).
I actually use \equiv to match structure instead of = in this LHS:
s{C \equiv x, E \equiv rho}
That is, I say that for whatever is in C, there exists an x of the type of x's
nonterminal (in this case
Just now, Jon Rafkind wrote:
This push resulted in the following failure (drdr will tell you the
same thing in a few minutes probably).
raco setup: error: during making for stepper/private
raco setup: expand: unbound identifier in module
raco setup: in: stepper-syntax-property
raco
Eli Barzilay wrote at 06/19/2012 08:11 PM:
* There's a whole range of tools that work with the usual
file:line:vol: message per line format -- Emacs compilation
buffer, the on-line-check-syntax-like error highlighting, log
parsers, etc. (The emacs on-line checking is something
On Jun 20, 2012, at 9:10 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
Just now, Jon Rafkind wrote:
This push resulted in the following failure (drdr will tell you the
same thing in a few minutes probably).
raco setup: error: during making for stepper/private
raco setup: expand: unbound identifier in module
Earlier today, Neil Toronto wrote:
On 06/19/2012 06:11 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
[...]
(plot sin)
[...]
Hear, hear! I make this mistake myself after going a month or two
without plotting anything.
(Off-topic for the thread, but why not make that work since it's
apparently an even
Here's a concrete proposal for error message structe. I'll leave the
highlevel philosophical discussion to the other threads -- but JFYI,
it does require accepting the problems I mention in the phrasing
thread.
The general idea is that the first line of an error message is a
title, and therefore
I really like this idea. It seems to be the best of both worlds. I
agree with Robby that more information and structure is good. I also
think, with Eli, that the first line is special for humans and for
existing tools.
Jay
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Eli Barzilay e...@barzilay.org wrote:
Thanks. I'll give this a try as soon as possible.
At Wed, 20 Jun 2012 13:32:32 -0400, Eli Barzilay wrote:
Here's a concrete proposal for error message structe. I'll leave the
highlevel philosophical discussion to the other threads -- but JFYI,
it does require accepting the problems I mention
Hi all,
I think I've found a bug in Racket's I/O. Please interpret the following
text as relating to the attached tarball with a small example of the
problem. The problem manifests for me on both platforms I've tried, OS X
and Linux.
When `sync`ing on `read-bytes-evt` at the same time as on
Sorry, I should have filed a bug report instead of mailing the list. I'm
filing the report now.
On 2012-06-20 8:22 PM, Tony Garnock-Jones wrote:
Hi all,
I think I've found a bug in Racket's I/O. Please interpret the following
text as relating to the attached tarball with a small example of
John Clements wrote at 06/20/2012 10:48 PM:
When I'm using online check syntax, I often look at the lines leaving
an identifier and wonder: is that just one line, or are there two or
three? When lines overlap, there's no easy way to tell. This can be
important in refactoring decisions, or in
14 matches
Mail list logo
