I'm trying to make a raco make-like command for ACL2 certification of
Dracula programs. Given a Racket program written using the Dracula
language, the command extracts a proof obligation, saves it as a .lisp
file, and runs ACL2 on it. There are a couple pieces of the Racket build
system that I
FWIW, I like the Alt-Arrows keybindings of DrRacket for moving around
s-exp, but they can probably be improved.
For example, Alt-Up goes up one level, and Alt-Shift-Up selects from the
cursor's position to the left paren.
It would probably be better if it selected the whole surrounding s-exp.
If
On 2013-06-09 23:25:43 +0530, Mayank Jain wrote:
While it does autocomplete the closing paren, it does not prevent you from
breaking the form if I accidentally delete the opening/closing paren.
This is a feature that I like a lot from paredit, because it provides
some level of confidence that I
I'm doing some cryptography exercises that involve a lot of hex
encoding/decoding. I see there's a bytes-hex-string function in
file/sha1 and openssl/sha1, but I can't find a decode function.
Is a hex decode function in the distribution?
Thanks,
Dave
_
Racket
On 2013-05-31 19:40:52 -0400, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
Is it feasible to get `member` to have the same optional argument
behavior as `assoc`? That is, to have an equality predicate as the third
argument.
I went ahead and implemented this behavior and submitted a pull request:
Do the times change if you put an 'in-range' in the for loops?
On Sunday, June 9, 2013, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
On 2013-05-31 19:40:52 -0400, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
Is it feasible to get `member` to have the same optional argument
behavior as `assoc`? That is, to have an equality predicate as
On 2013-06-09 20:51:21 -0500, Robby Findler wrote:
Do the times change if you put an 'in-range' in the for loops?
Is this the code change you meant?
#lang racket/base
(require (only-in racket/list range))
(define lst (range 1 5000))
(time
(for ([i (in-range 3)])
(member
Sorry: I should have been clearer: I would only expect a difference when
the list is short (so your benchmark 2).
Robby
On Sunday, June 9, 2013, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
On 2013-06-09 20:51:21 -0500, Robby Findler wrote:
Do the times change if you put an 'in-range' in the for loops?
Is
On 2013-06-09 21:15:31 -0500, Robby Findler wrote:
Sorry: I should have been clearer: I would only expect a difference when
the list is short (so your benchmark 2).
Here're the numbers for that:
#lang racket/base
(define lst '(a b c))
(time
(for ([i (in-range 3000)])
It looks like get-module-code from syntax/modcode does what I want
internally. I've submitted a pull request on github in which I've split
out the two extra functions I need using the functionality that exists. I
modernized the Racket style in that file before making the changes --
turning let
10 matches
Mail list logo
