Re: [racket-users] How to test that a file is syntactically correct, but don't run it

Or check out Shill. It may just be what you want. — Matthias > On Nov 26, 2016, at 3:45 PM, Alexis King wrote: > > Many of the other answers here are good, but I want to try and give a > couple more options and a little more context. > > First of all, in Racket, the

Re: [racket-users] Best alternate editor/IDE for someone who gets overwhelmed by complexity

The documentation site includes links to PDFs. You could print — Matthias > On Nov 26, 2016, at 3:22 PM, SR wrote: > > The "Program Contour" feature is another revelation! I appreciate, finally, > why those "pesky" many-line declarations of things like > ;

RE: [racket-users] Re: Best alternate editor/IDE for someone who gets overwhelmed by complexity

Go to menu item: edit, preferences, background-expansion and enable it. Sometimes it is necessary to close and reopen DrRacket to get the choices active. Jos -Original Message- From: racket-users@googlegroups.com [mailto:racket-users@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of SR Sent: sábado, 26

Re: [racket-users] How to test that a file is syntactically correct, but don't run it

Many of the other answers here are good, but I want to try and give a couple more options and a little more context. First of all, in Racket, the phrase “syntactically correct” is a little bit vague. It could mean that a program is successfully parsed from text to s-expressions, which is the

[racket-users] Re: Best alternate editor/IDE for someone who gets overwhelmed by complexity

Jos, What is "background expansion" and how do I turn it on to see if it helps me? I just did a search of help and didn't find the term. I did look around in view but don't see that as a choice. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users"

[racket-users] Re: Best alternate editor/IDE for someone who gets overwhelmed by complexity

The "Program Contour" feature is another revelation! I appreciate, finally, why those "pesky" many-line declarations of things like ;;; ; ;;; ; ;; ; ; ;; ; ; ; ; ; ;; ; ;

Re: [racket-users] Best alternate editor/IDE for someone who gets overwhelmed by complexity

As Matthew B wrote, but in general, I think you have hit the nail on the head — if you come from/are used to a world where the IDE governs your thinking. With Racket we try a different approach; we want the language to govern your thinking and we want the language to allow you to think

Re: [racket-users] Best alternate editor/IDE for someone who gets overwhelmed by complexity

On Nov 26, 2016, at 7:54 AM, SR wrote: > I am hoping someone out there can recommend a strong editor / IDE which makes > it trivial to collapse blocks of code or otherwise make it a lot easier to > navigate through long racket programs FWIW, DrRacket does have a "Collapse

Re: [racket-users] DrRacket Crashes on New MacBook Pro

Thanks. I believe the 32 bit version works, so you can use that as a workaround for now. Robby On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 11:34 AM, 'Scott Brown' via Racket Users wrote: > I recently bought a new MacBook Pro and installed Racket. Unfortunately, > DrRacket crashes

[racket-users] DrRacket Crashes on New MacBook Pro

I recently bought a new MacBook Pro and installed Racket. Unfortunately, DrRacket crashes immediately when I try to open it. It appears to be due an issue with its interaction with the touch bar. Below is the problem report from the crash. -Scott Process: DrRacket [16616] Path:

[racket-users] Best alternate editor/IDE for someone who gets overwhelmed by complexity

Hi, I've never been a great programmer although I've done a fair amount of programming back in the days of C, Pascal, etc. I think racket is the right language for me based on expressive power, etc. but I confess it currently seems like about the worst language for me in terms of "can't see

Re: [racket-users] eval:check and floating-point precision

On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 11:37 AM, luis.osa.gdc wrote: > Hi, everyone! > ``` > (check-= (t-test bacteria-a bacteria-b) 13.0 0.1) > ``` > > In short: is there a way to specify tolerance in `eval:check`? Perhaps, instead of checking directly the result of t-test you can

RE: [racket-users] css and js files when using scribble

Thanks for the clear answer. I'll try raco pkg install ..., but command line stuff is troublesome on windows. But I'll try. Jos _ From: Matthew Butterick [mailto:m...@mbtype.com] Sent: viernes, 25 de noviembre de 2016 23:03 To: Jos Koot Cc: Racket Users Subject: Re: [racket-users] css

Re: [racket-users] How to test that a file is syntactically correct, but don't run it

Some weeks ago, I just had the exact same problem while developing a "server.rkt" module with Vim. I use the Syntactic plugin to check syntax, and this plugin in turn uses the `racket` executable to find syntax problems. My solution was to add the args "--load" when executing the module with

[racket-users] eval:check and floating-point precision

Hi, everyone! I am writing a simple statistical package for Racket, and I would like to have tests within my Scribble documentation (as well as Rackunit tests in the implementation modules). For the Scribble tests, I am using `eval:check`. But I have noticed that the tests do not pass unless

Re: [racket-users] How to test that a file is syntactically correct, but don't run it

raco read or raco expand may be the closest to doing this without doing much else. https://docs.racket-lang.org/raco/read.html Is there some way to e.g. hook some of DrRackets syntax checker up to a raco check-syntax? That would be convenient in the terminal. -- Sent from my phoneamajig >