Hi all,
I am reading the book Htdp and learning Racket and enjoying. I would like
to know Racket usage in enterprise(read software in java!) I can see there
are great packages for json/http etc. How does it compare with java based
frameworks like Spring Boot for developing Microservices? Do yo
On 09/24/2018 08:51 PM, 'John Clements' via Racket Users wrote:
The new OS X will feature a “dark mode”. I suspect that lots of Mac owners will
be clamoring for DrRacket “dark mode” real soon now. Ars Technica has a nice
review of the OS, including a whole bunch about the new dark mode:
http
The new OS X will feature a “dark mode”. I suspect that lots of Mac owners will
be clamoring for DrRacket “dark mode” real soon now. Ars Technica has a nice
review of the OS, including a whole bunch about the new dark mode:
https://arstechnica.com/features/2018/09/macos-10-14-mojave-the-ars-tech
On Mon, 24 Sep 2018 20:18:15 +0100, er...@snafu.de
wrote:
>Are you sure that's a wise choice of license?
I don't like either the GPL or LGPL.
But as a technical matter ...
>Racket does not dynamically link to Racket libraries when applications
>are deployed as compiled executables - as far a
Thank you all. Sounds like a case-by-case approach is probably best.
I did find the github licence advice pages. It seems that not choosing a
licence is probably a bad choice when publishing a racket package:
https://choosealicense.com/no-permission/
I can't believe I missed the Racket licence p
Yes, it could be that LGPL is not the best for Racket package authors
who intend something analogous to LGPL for C libraries. (Or who intend
not necessarily that, but something in the neighborhood of that flavor
or degree.)
Law quickly gets way outside my expertise, and the finer points seem
David linked above to https://download.racket-lang.org/license.html, where
the Racket maintainers (who are not lawyers, and neither am I) explain
their interpretation of how "linking" in the LGPL applies to Racket. I
think it's worth copying here for the record:
Since the LGPL license that Racket
Are you sure that's a wise choice of license?
Racket does not dynamically link to Racket libraries when applications
are deployed as compiled executables - as far as I can see, the
standard module system does not link dynamically in the sense required
by the LGPL(*). Therefore, LGPL doesn't allow
What's seemed to work over many years for my Racket open source packages
(a couple of which are useful things that would be expensive to rewrite)
is LGPL (initially version 2.x, but lately version 3), plus a statement
to contact me about other possible licenses.
My thinking was, LGPL suggests
On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 6:03 AM, Stephen De Gabrielle <
spdegabrie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I sometimes see Racket packages on PLaneT or Github, but lack a licence.
>
> I don’t feel I can redistribute or fork abandoned code if it lacks a
> licence. (I can give an example of an 11yo abandoned
On Tue, Sep 18, 2018 at 3:15 PM, David Storrs
wrote:
> The following is the example taken from the table-panel docs. (
> https://docs.racket-lang.org/table-panel/index.html) It displays a
> frame with four sets of numeric keypads laid out in quadrants. If you
> expand the window, the expectati
On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 11:19:11AM +0100, Laurent wrote:
> Same here, I've grown happy with the #:keyword notation because it is a
> reader thing, not a symbol.
>
> The other nice option would be like Python and others to make procedure
> implicitly take dictionaries to allow choosing at each call
On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 6:41 PM Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> Laurent wrote on 9/19/18 8:29 AM:
> > I don't mind `#:`, but I'd prefer to write `[#:foo 5]` rather than
> > `#:foo [foo 5]`, that is, I don't like the repetition of the name (I
> > first came to Racket precisely to avoid repeating code).
>
>
Same here, I've grown happy with the #:keyword notation because it is a
reader thing, not a symbol.
The other nice option would be like Python and others to make procedure
implicitly take dictionaries to allow choosing at each call site between
position-based and name-based argument passing for ea
Hi,
I sometimes see Racket packages on PLaneT or Github, but lack a licence.
I don’t feel I can redistribute or fork abandoned code if it lacks a
licence. (I can give an example of an 11yo abandoned project that I’d love
to fork but can’t because it lacks a licence)
With that in mind- what licen
15 matches
Mail list logo
