At Wed, 4 Sep 2013 12:05:47 -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> That's very nice -- and faster, to boot. One thing I'm confused about
> -- why is the `parameterize` around the second call to
> `directory-list` needed? Does it query `current-directory`
> internally?
Yes: `(car l)` will be a path t
Sorry it took so long, but I've submitted a pull request to make this
function public in file/sha1:
https://github.com/plt/racket/pull/426
Let me know if I screwed up, it's my first pull request.
Thanks,
Dave
On 06/11/2013 05:11 PM, Robby Findler wrote:
Yes, I think file/sha1 is the right pl
It looks to me like most of the tests in
racket/pkgs/racket-pkgs/racket-test/tests/file/* are not being run by
DrDr. I think DrDr is running them with 'raco test _' while the files
mostly need to be run as 'racket _'.
Am I missing something? If not, should I fix the files to be run with
'ra
That's very nice -- and faster, to boot. One thing I'm confused about
-- why is the `parameterize` around the second call to
`directory-list` needed? Does it query `current-directory`
internally?
Oh, and a `define-sequence-syntax` version is even a little faster.
I'll push all of this soon.
Sam
Inspired by a post about a faster directory iteration in Haskell [1],
I decided to try doing the same for Racket. The results are here:
https://gist.github.com/samth/6437192
The current implementation uses continuations, which are pretty slow.
The fastest solution would fuse the traversal and pro
On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Greg Hendershott wrote:
> This looks great!!
>
> A couple suggestions:
>
> 1. Support for "Expect: 100-continue" request headers would be
> helpful, and I think not too messy to add.
>
> The big use case I'm aware of is Amazon S3. If you make a PUT or POST
> reque
When continuations are too expensive, consider representing the
continuation explicitly. In this case, I think a list of paths
represents the continuation easily enough.
(define (in-directory5 [orig-dir #f])
(define init-dir
(or orig-dir (current-directory)))
;; current state of the sequen
I think it makes more sense to change those 'main' modules into 'test'
modules, but I'm not positive.
Robby
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 12:26 PM, David Vanderson
wrote:
> It looks to me like most of the tests in
> racket/pkgs/racket-pkgs/**racket-test/tests/file/*
> are not being run by DrDr. I th
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
>
> (directory-list
> (path->complete-path d init-dir)))])
I'm pretty sure this is wrong, but I'm not sure how to fix it. In
particular, there's no reason that `init-dir` sho
At Wed, 4 Sep 2013 15:13:31 -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> >
> > (directory-list
> > (path->complete-path d init-dir)))])
>
>
> I'm pretty sure this is wrong, but I'm n
On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> At Wed, 4 Sep 2013 15:13:31 -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
>> >
>> > (directory-list
>> > (path->complete-path d in
One more try, to fix problems with adding relative paths and for a
starting path that isn't an existing directory:
(define (in-directory6 [orig-dir #f])
(define init-dir (current-directory))
;; current state of the sequence is a list of paths to produce; when
;; incrementing past a directory
At Wed, 4 Sep 2013 15:44:41 -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> > At Wed, 4 Sep 2013 15:13:31 -0400, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> >> On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> >> >
> >> > (directo
I totally missed
pkgs/racket-pkgs/racket-test/tests/run-automated-tests.rkt, but it looks
like DrDr is running that with 'mzc -k _' - doesn't that just compile it?
There is also a file/main.rkt that runs all the file/ tests, but that
file doesn't show up in DrDr.
I'm more confused now. Does
14 matches
Mail list logo
