Re: [racket-dev] TR internal error
On 2013-01-21 10:48:48 +0100, Pierpaolo Bernardi wrote: >the file attached causes the following internal error: >Internal Typechecker Error: bad expected: #(struct:tc-results >(#(struct:tc-result Char - -) #(struct:tc-result (Vector Integer Integer >Integer Integer) - -)) #f) >while typechecking: >(#%app vector ah am as af) >originally: >(vector ah am as af) Thanks for the report! Sorry for not getting around to this earlier, but I've pushed a fix now. Cheers, Asumu _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] Mangaging `unstable` with packages
I'm not completely clear on what latent-contracts are, but perhaps options should be being used there? Robby On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: > The new package organization gives us a chance to re-asses the > "unstable" collection. > > Going forward, I think the "unstable" collection should be used in the > following ways: > > 1. If you build something that you think is general-purpose, but is > only used in one package, put it in `unstable/foo`, but keep it inside > that package. > > 2. If you either (a) want to use some other package's `unstable/foo` > library, or (b) create such a library that's used across multiple > packages, create a separate package called "unstable-foo" for it. > > It's perhaps worth saying why we still need "unstable" at all in the > new regime. We might just create a new package for, say, parameter > groups, and just add that as a dependency of "plot". But that would > ship a library in a useful location, and potentially commit us to that > library and API for the future. So I think we should keep "unstable" > around. > > With that said, I'd like to also propose moving the following out of > "unstable": > > # `unstable/list` > > - `remf`, `list-update` `list-set` `map/values`: move to `racket/list` > - `group-by`: rename to `group`, add keyword argument `#:by` > defaulting to `equal?`, move to `racket/list` > > - `extend`, `filter/values`: move back into Typed Racket > - `list-prefix?`: move back into the web server > > - `map2`, `check-duplicate`, `*-common-prefix`: Delete > > # `unstable/parameter-group` > > This is used by both the "image" and "plot" libraries. Create a new > top-level collection and package. > > # `unstable/latent-contract` > > Currently undocumented. Used by the image collection anyway. This > needs to be fixed. > > That's it for things outside of the "unstable" package, which I'll > tackle another time. > > Sam > _ > Racket Developers list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev > _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
[racket-dev] Mangaging `unstable` with packages
The new package organization gives us a chance to re-asses the "unstable" collection. Going forward, I think the "unstable" collection should be used in the following ways: 1. If you build something that you think is general-purpose, but is only used in one package, put it in `unstable/foo`, but keep it inside that package. 2. If you either (a) want to use some other package's `unstable/foo` library, or (b) create such a library that's used across multiple packages, create a separate package called "unstable-foo" for it. It's perhaps worth saying why we still need "unstable" at all in the new regime. We might just create a new package for, say, parameter groups, and just add that as a dependency of "plot". But that would ship a library in a useful location, and potentially commit us to that library and API for the future. So I think we should keep "unstable" around. With that said, I'd like to also propose moving the following out of "unstable": # `unstable/list` - `remf`, `list-update` `list-set` `map/values`: move to `racket/list` - `group-by`: rename to `group`, add keyword argument `#:by` defaulting to `equal?`, move to `racket/list` - `extend`, `filter/values`: move back into Typed Racket - `list-prefix?`: move back into the web server - `map2`, `check-duplicate`, `*-common-prefix`: Delete # `unstable/parameter-group` This is used by both the "image" and "plot" libraries. Create a new top-level collection and package. # `unstable/latent-contract` Currently undocumented. Used by the image collection anyway. This needs to be fixed. That's it for things outside of the "unstable" package, which I'll tackle another time. Sam _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
[racket-dev] path->relative-string/setup
Hi all, It looks like in the recent pkg reorganization, the function `path->relative-string/setup` has disappeared from the `setup/path-to-relative` module. As a result, XREPL's ,enter doesn't work anymore and possibly other things. Is this an intentional omission or was it just lost by accident? Cheers, Asumu _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] [plt] Push #26996: master branch updated
At Thu, 20 Jun 2013 13:31:00 -0600, Neil Toronto wrote: > Should I do the same kind of thing with "math/tests" and "plot/tests"? > In general, should everything have a separate tests package? It probably depends on the package/project. A project with separate "-lib" and "-doc" packages seems more likely to benefit from a separate "-test" package. I think we're going to have to experiment to decide whether and when it's a good idea, though. _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
