Re: [racket-dev] Using clang to Build Racket on Mac OS X

2011-09-10 Thread Will M. Farr
Thanks, Matthew! It seems to build OK now. Will On Sep 11, 2011, at 6:42 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote: > At Wed, 27 Jul 2011 10:38:44 -0500, "Will M. Farr" wrote: >> The only wart in the process is the following: when compiling with clang or >> llvm-gcc with the -O4 o

[racket-dev] Using clang to Build Racket on Mac OS X

2011-07-27 Thread Will M. Farr
Hello Racket Developers, I thought I would write a quick note about building Racket on Mac OS X 10.6.8 with the new clang compiler (the new front-end to the LLVM compiler backend that is becoming the standard compiler on Mac OS X for XCode 4 and later). Overall, it's been a good experience. A

[racket-dev] flvector-copy

2010-09-16 Thread Will M. Farr
Hello all, The attached patch against the current git master adds an flvector-copy procedure (along with docs and tests); it's simple, but nice to have in the flvector library. Let me know if there are any issues with including this in racket. Thanks, Will 0004-Added-flvector-copy-with-tes

Re: [racket-dev] Contract Errors in the Test Suite

2010-09-12 Thread Will M. Farr
FYI, I've submitted a bug to the bug tracker detailing this problem. Will On Sep 11, 2010, at 5:04 PM, Will M. Farr wrote: > I've finished the testing of configure options. It seems to be the places > library. Running with or without optimization options, the --enable-p

Re: [racket-dev] Contract Errors in the Test Suite

2010-09-11 Thread Will M. Farr
at 4:39 PM, Will M. Farr wrote: > On Sep 11, 2010, at 4:20 PM, Robby Findler wrote: > >> My laptop has a version of the tree >> from about 10 days ago and I'm not seeing any errors there. Is there >> something more that would help me reproduce this behavior? >>

Re: [racket-dev] Contract Errors in the Test Suite

2010-09-11 Thread Will M. Farr
On Sep 11, 2010, at 4:20 PM, Robby Findler wrote: > My laptop has a version of the tree > from about 10 days ago and I'm not seeing any errors there. Is there > something more that would help me reproduce this behavior? > > Thanks, > Robby Huh. Or maybe it's option 4: system/OS dependent. I'm

[racket-dev] Contract Errors in the Test Suite

2010-09-11 Thread Will M. Farr
Hello developers, I've been compiling Racket from git a lot lately (working on some iteration forms that now appear in the repository---thanks Sam!), and each time I do, I run the test suite. For the past few weeks (month?) I've been getting a lot of errors related to the contract system. I t

Re: [racket-dev] PLaneT Library of Iterations/Comprehensions

2010-08-24 Thread Will M. Farr
r checking so you >> might want to look at it. I also have for/fold/vector and some >> sequence abstractions. The code is all parameterised at expansion time >> by the vector representation. >> >> http://github.com/noelwelsh/numeric >> >> N. >> >&

Re: [racket-dev] gc vs assignment

2010-08-24 Thread Will M. Farr
On Aug 24, 2010, at 10:46 AM, Matthias Felleisen wrote: > (I don't quite understand why there's no extra cost for the second access, > but I'll think about it and figure it out.) If I understand things correctly, the short answer is "fancy hardware." The page is marked as read-only in the MMU,

Re: [racket-dev] [plt] Push #20898: master branch updated

2010-08-23 Thread Will M. Farr
On Aug 23, 2010, at 7:40 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote: > > Maybe you want to thread the vector index through using `for/fold' > instead of drawing the index from a sequence. The expansion could > insert enough `#:when' clauses to compare the index to the length > before each nested iteration. > This

Re: [racket-dev] [plt] Push #20898: master branch updated

2010-08-22 Thread Will M. Farr
2, 2010, at 4:11 PM, Noel Welsh wrote: > On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 9:36 PM, Will M. Farr wrote: >> Matthew & co, > ... >> I'll make sure to throw a syntax error if I see a #:when in the for-clauses, >> and I think I should give up on the for*/vector #:length variant

Re: [racket-dev] [plt] Push #20898: master branch updated

2010-08-22 Thread Will M. Farr
Matthew & co, On Aug 21, 2010, at 7:14 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote: > I didn't think of this before, but probably you should add a check that > the length expression proceduces a nonnegative exact integer: > > (syntax/loc stx > (let ((len length-expr)) > (unless (exact-

Re: [racket-dev] [plt] Push #20898: master branch updated

2010-08-20 Thread Will M. Farr
Matthew, Thanks very much for the comments. I'll get to work preparing an updated version using #:size soon, and send it to Sam for pushing. As for the issue of a #:size that doesn't match the length of the iteration, I have been thinking about adding a check inside the loop (for sizes that a

Re: [racket-dev] PLaneT Library of Iterations/Comprehensions

2010-08-19 Thread Will M. Farr
Sam, On Aug 18, 2010, at 1:39 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: >> >> The for/... forms have the option of having a first expression that gives >> the length of the resulting object (similar to srfi-42's vector-of-length-ec >> form) to allow generating more efficient code: >> >> (for/vector ((x

[racket-dev] PLaneT Library of Iterations/Comprehensions

2010-08-18 Thread Will M. Farr
Hello all, I've been thinking for a while about putting together a PLaneT library of some iteration/comprehension forms that I often use that are not found in the racket core. Right now, I have a small it-comp.plt local PLaneT package that contains for/vector for/flvector in-flvector The for/