At the end of part 12.6.3 of the docs in
http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/reader.html, it gives some examples
Examples:
-1
reads equal to
-1
1/2
reads equal to
(/ 1 2)
1.0
reads equal to
(inexact-exact 1)
1+2i
reads equal to
(make-complex 1 2)
1/2+3/4i
reads equal to
On Jul 27, The Configurator wrote:
Shouldn't all the usages of inexact-exact here actually be
exact-inexact ?
Yes, thanks -- fixed in git.
--
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!
How is this:
By default make install and raco setup build collects in parallel on all
available processors.
Use env PLT_SETUP_OPTIONS=-j 1 make install or raco setup -j 1 to
build using only one processor.
Kevin
On 07/27/2010 10:06 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
On Jul 27, Kevin Tew wrote:
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Kevin Tew t...@cs.utah.edu wrote:
On Jul 27, Kevin Tew wrote:
Parallel-build is somewhat behind the scenes. I would delay talking
about it until the next release which will include -j documentation
and parallel rendering of docs.
Shouldn't the docs be
If this hasn't come up yet here, please do take a look at
http://donsbot.wordpress.com/2010/05/31/there-are-a-hell-of-a-lot-of-haskell-libraries-now-what-are-we-going-to-do-about-it/
I am sure we will face this kind of problem one day and we might be able to
prepare ourselves a bit.
IMHO planet works very well and shouldn't have issue to scale beyond a few
thousand packages if it ever gets to that point. However, to get there I
believe planet first needs one major upgrade - it needs to become location
transparent - meaning that requiring modules in COLLECTS and PLANET look
I recall your proposal from back then, and I will give you my thoughts:
1. a 'remote url' require (which is what Planet boils down to) imposes a
serious cost overhead (for compilation) and a connectivity overhead (suppose I
send you code and you wish to compile it on your netbook while on the
I looked at the message where you link and I didn't see how one would
go about this.
I guess the idea is that you'd eliminate the syntactic difference
between a planet-located library and one in the distribution and then
require on some external source to know where the package is located?
On 7/27/10 11:17 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
The release announcement sketch that I have so far is below. Please
send edits or (changes in order) if you see anything.
* Changes (as part of 5.0) in the `racket' language compared to the
`scheme' language include constructor-style printing, a
Basically, CPAN is a way of distributing and finding tarballs that
have Perl code it in. The CPAN tool installs these things into a
system or user directory of collects. People have written Perl
modules that overload the module lookup to find and download new CPAN
packages if necessary.
If PLaneT
I think we can and must improve the browsing, searching, rating, etc
parts of PLaneT. There's no shame in copying Hackage, CPAN, etc on
these areas because they are probably very wise in their decisions.
I would like to make DrDr build and test every PLaneT package on some
basis (perhaps when the
Thanks Matthias - please see inline.
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 7:03 PM, Matthias Felleisen matth...@ccs.neu.eduwrote:
1. a 'remote url' require (which is what Planet boils down to) imposes a
serious cost overhead (for compilation) and a connectivity overhead (suppose
I send you code and you
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 7:06 PM, Robby Findler
ro...@eecs.northwestern.eduwrote:
I guess the idea is that you'd eliminate the syntactic difference
between a planet-located library and one in the distribution and then
require on some external source to know where the package is located?
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 8:57 PM, Jay McCarthy jay.mccar...@gmail.comwrote:
If PLaneT worked the same way, it would just be a way of
distributing our .plt files.
This is a great way to think about planet - a distribution mechanism that
can be used to distribute any package.
On Tue, Jul 27,
14 matches
Mail list logo
