Re: [racket-dev] Slideshow package needs more splitting
Indeed it would. -Ian - Original Message - From: Robby Findler ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu To: J. Ian Johnson i...@ccs.neu.edu Cc: dev dev@racket-lang.org Sent: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 19:58:28 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: [racket-dev] Slideshow package needs more splitting I guess probably everything except play, play-n, and animate-slide could be split out. Would that have helped you? Robby On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 5:14 PM, J. Ian Johnson i...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: Mm, I believe it's collection-level. Perhaps if play.rkt were split into anim.rkt and play.rkt, where anim.rkt has all the non-gui code, and play.rkt has the gui code. Requiring slideshow/play in my library caused the doc failure. -Ian - Original Message - From: Robby Findler ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu To: J. Ian Johnson i...@ccs.neu.edu Cc: dev dev@racket-lang.org Sent: Monday, November 4, 2013 5:58:36 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [racket-dev] Slideshow package needs more splitting I think there might be some collection/pkg confusion here. Are you having trouble with a package level dependency or a collection level one? (The latter is the only kind that can lead to the documentation error you're talking about I believe.) Robby On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 4:51 PM, J. Ian Johnson i...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: I've been working on a package of different pict transformers/constructors I've made while giving slideshow presentations, with some pain. In particular, slideshow-lib pulls in the gui dependency, making documentation impossible. I had to just copy the code for slide-pict and fast-start from slideshow/play into my package, which I really hate doing. If at all possible, can we split the pict-only parts of slideshow-lib into a different collection, say slideshow-pict-lib or something? Or perhaps just add more to pict-pkgs? Thanks, -Ian _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] Release for v6.0 is about to begin
Well, I think Ryan is talking about people who are coding a new
feature that's nearly ready. Not soliciting ideas for last-minute
ideas to try to rush into v6. Nice try, though. :)
Having said that, have you tried using at-exps for this?
I've only thought about this for a few minutes, and there are pros and
cons, but:
- - - - - - -
#lang at-exp racket
;;^^
;; Don't like regexps in quotes?
(regexp-match #px^foo foo)
;; Do this instead:
(regexp-match @pregexp{^foo} foo)
;; OK, but:
;; 1. A bit verbose.
;; 2. Those aren't precompiled regexps, like with #px
;; 3. Also if the {} spans multiple lines, it needs to be converted
;; into just one string.
;; So:
(define px (compose1 pregexp ~a))
(define rx (compose1 regexp ~a))
;; Now you can write this:
(regexp-match @px{^foo} foo)
;; Ta da !!
;; You can include newlines without using \n
(regexp-match @px{^foo
bar} foo\nbar)
;; But bad news, you can't use \n anymore.
;; (regexp-match @px{^foo[\n]bar} foo\nbar)
;; = regexp: illegal alphabetic escape
;; The other way is to @ quote:
@~a{@#\newline}
@~a{@\n}
(regexp-match @px{^foo@\nbar} foo\nbar)
;; OTOH, good news is that regexp backslashes can be used as-is -- no
;; need for the extra \
(regexp-match @px{1\.0} 1.0)
;; p.s. How to escape @ in an at-exp? @@
(regexp-match @rx{^foo@@bar\.com} f...@bar.com)
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 8:40 PM, WarGrey Gyoudmon Ju
juzhenli...@gmail.com wrote:
Could you please make the regular expression syntax more elegant?
To replace the with // or any other character as its boundary.
Here is the example:
#px/^\s*\/([^\/])\/\s*$/ === #px@^\s*/([^/])/\s*$@ ===
#px^\\s*/([^/])/\\s*$
Thank you in advance.
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 12:51 AM, Ryan Culpepper ry...@ccs.neu.edu wrote:
The release process for v6.0 will begin in about a week. If
you have any new features that you want in and are relatively close
to being done, now is a good time to do that.
_
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
_
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
_
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] Slideshow package needs more splitting
Okay, I've pushed that change. Thanks, Robby On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 6:29 AM, J. Ian Johnson i...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: Indeed it would. -Ian - Original Message - From: Robby Findler ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu To: J. Ian Johnson i...@ccs.neu.edu Cc: dev dev@racket-lang.org Sent: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 19:58:28 -0500 (EST) Subject: Re: [racket-dev] Slideshow package needs more splitting I guess probably everything except play, play-n, and animate-slide could be split out. Would that have helped you? Robby On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 5:14 PM, J. Ian Johnson i...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: Mm, I believe it's collection-level. Perhaps if play.rkt were split into anim.rkt and play.rkt, where anim.rkt has all the non-gui code, and play.rkt has the gui code. Requiring slideshow/play in my library caused the doc failure. -Ian - Original Message - From: Robby Findler ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu To: J. Ian Johnson i...@ccs.neu.edu Cc: dev dev@racket-lang.org Sent: Monday, November 4, 2013 5:58:36 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [racket-dev] Slideshow package needs more splitting I think there might be some collection/pkg confusion here. Are you having trouble with a package level dependency or a collection level one? (The latter is the only kind that can lead to the documentation error you're talking about I believe.) Robby On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 4:51 PM, J. Ian Johnson i...@ccs.neu.edu wrote: I've been working on a package of different pict transformers/constructors I've made while giving slideshow presentations, with some pain. In particular, slideshow-lib pulls in the gui dependency, making documentation impossible. I had to just copy the code for slide-pict and fast-start from slideshow/play into my package, which I really hate doing. If at all possible, can we split the pict-only parts of slideshow-lib into a different collection, say slideshow-pict-lib or something? Or perhaps just add more to pict-pkgs? Thanks, -Ian _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] how to test rackunit
On Sat, Nov 02, 2013 at 10:48:39PM -0600, Jay McCarthy wrote: http://drdr.racket-lang.org/27688/pkgs/rackunit-pkgs/rackunit-test/tests/rackunit/run-tests.rkt One thing that you will see is that as part of testing there are some failing tests to see what happens, but the tests deliberately switch current-error-port with current-input-port so that it does not result in STDERR output that DrDr would count as a failure. Jay, thanks for the information. Reading about DrDr [1] was enlightening. I'm not sure this was your intention, but it confirmed for me that I should be capturing the (standard error) output of the 'raco test ...' command before and after my changes to make sure the only changes are those I intend. David [1] http://drdr.racket-lang.org/help _ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
Re: [racket-dev] Release for v6.0 is about to begin
Okay, I've extended the readtable.
At-exp is preferable, and I do use at-exps in other circumstances.
Thank you, Greg.
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 5:40 AM, Greg Hendershott
greghendersh...@gmail.comwrote:
Well, I think Ryan is talking about people who are coding a new
feature that's nearly ready. Not soliciting ideas for last-minute
ideas to try to rush into v6. Nice try, though. :)
Having said that, have you tried using at-exps for this?
I've only thought about this for a few minutes, and there are pros and
cons, but:
- - - - - - -
#lang at-exp racket
;;^^
;; Don't like regexps in quotes?
(regexp-match #px^foo foo)
;; Do this instead:
(regexp-match @pregexp{^foo} foo)
;; OK, but:
;; 1. A bit verbose.
;; 2. Those aren't precompiled regexps, like with #px
;; 3. Also if the {} spans multiple lines, it needs to be converted
;; into just one string.
;; So:
(define px (compose1 pregexp ~a))
(define rx (compose1 regexp ~a))
;; Now you can write this:
(regexp-match @px{^foo} foo)
;; Ta da !!
;; You can include newlines without using \n
(regexp-match @px{^foo
bar} foo\nbar)
;; But bad news, you can't use \n anymore.
;; (regexp-match @px{^foo[\n]bar} foo\nbar)
;; = regexp: illegal alphabetic escape
;; The other way is to @ quote:
@~a{@#\newline}
@~a{@\n}
(regexp-match @px{^foo@\nbar} foo\nbar)
;; OTOH, good news is that regexp backslashes can be used as-is -- no
;; need for the extra \
(regexp-match @px{1\.0} 1.0)
;; p.s. How to escape @ in an at-exp? @@
(regexp-match @rx{^foo@@bar\.com} f...@bar.com)
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 8:40 PM, WarGrey Gyoudmon Ju
juzhenli...@gmail.com wrote:
Could you please make the regular expression syntax more elegant?
To replace the with // or any other character as its boundary.
Here is the example:
#px/^\s*\/([^\/])\/\s*$/ === #px@^\s*/([^/])/\s*$@ ===
#px^\\s*/([^/])/\\s*$
Thank you in advance.
On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 12:51 AM, Ryan Culpepper ry...@ccs.neu.edu
wrote:
The release process for v6.0 will begin in about a week. If
you have any new features that you want in and are relatively close
to being done, now is a good time to do that.
_
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
_
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
_
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
