Indeed it does.
Thanks!
On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 7:53 AM, Jon Zeppieri wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Daniel Prager
> wrote:
> >
> > But I get a perplexing error if I try to use foldl for added elegance
> when
> > defining twos:
> >
> > (define (cc x . xs) (foldl sadd (fcoin x) xs))
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Daniel Prager
wrote:
>
> But I get a perplexing error if I try to use foldl for added elegance when
> defining twos:
>
> (define (cc x . xs) (foldl sadd (fcoin x) xs))
> (define twos (cc 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 200))
>
> take: expects type as 1st argument, given: '(1
>
The classic making change problem cropped up in discussion on the Racket
reddit with solutions proffered in Haskell and Clojure.
See:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Racket/comments/6gumem/what_is_a_string_p/dixlvpr/
I was able to contribute a Lazy Racket translation:
#lang lazy
(define zeros (cons 0 z
Good point. The Strange Loop policy looks OK to me. Another one I
think is OK is FSF LibrePlanet's.
Racket is an usually good community (which is the biggest reason I'm
here), and I really don't expect any problem at RacketCon. But I know
that these kinds of policies have been necessary and
Agreed. Possibly with someone(s) to be the official point of contact for issues
related to it.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to racket-users+unsu
I agree that we should have one.
- Sam Caldwell
On Fri, Jun 16, 2017 at 2:50 PM, Stephen De Gabrielle <
spdegabrie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Awesome. (It's an opinion)
>
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2017 at 19:48, Alexis King wrote:
>
>> +1 from me. I think the Strange Loop CoC is a good one to emulate.
>>
>>
Awesome. (It's an opinion)
On Fri, 16 Jun 2017 at 19:48, Alexis King wrote:
> +1 from me. I think the Strange Loop CoC is a good one to emulate.
>
> > On Jun 16, 2017, at 11:44 AM, Leif Andersen
> > wrote:
> >
> > RacketCon 2017 should have a code of conduct, as pointed out by Claire
> > on twit
+1 from me. I think the Strange Loop CoC is a good one to emulate.
> On Jun 16, 2017, at 11:44 AM, Leif Andersen
> wrote:
>
> RacketCon 2017 should have a code of conduct, as pointed out by Claire
> on twitter [1], and I absolutely agree. It doesn't have to be anything
> fancy, and can be a fair
RacketCon 2017 should have a code of conduct, as pointed out by Claire on
twitter [1], and I absolutely agree. It doesn't have to be anything fancy,
and can be a fairly standard one.
Although we are not co-located with Strange Loop this year, they have a
fairly sensible one that we could use [2],
9 matches
Mail list logo
