Re: [racket-users] Redex compatible closure of mutually defined nonterminals

On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 03:55:09PM -0500, Robby Findler wrote: > I can agree that the current definition isn't the best one, but this > one doesn't seem right. I mean, this requires that both sides step? It > is a kind of parallel reduction? That doesn't seem like something > commonly wanted. Yeah,

Re: [racket-users] tilda - a threading macro full of itself

> On May 7, 2019, at 1:29 PM, zeRusski wrote: > > It just names the threaded value. Did I overlook anything? > > That's right, nothing fancy. Think let-binding the threaded value at that > point. #:with id ~ would achieve the same thing, so as it is now #:as is > redundant. With #:do both #:

Re: [racket-users] Redex compatible closure of mutually defined nonterminals

On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 2:11 PM William J. Bowman wrote: > > I took a quick look at the implementation of `cross` and `compatible-closure`, > and couldn't make sense of any of it. > For now, I guess I'll manually write out the contexts, and discuss a feature > request. > > I spoke to Max a bit abo

[racket-users] Re: how do you read, manipulate, debug scope sets?

It's not an answer to your broader question, but I suspect what you actually want here is #+begin_src racket ;; inside syntax-parse (datum->syntax this-syntax '<~) #+end_src Notice that the second argument to datum->syntax should be a symbol here, rather than a syntax object. If you provide

Re: [racket-users] Re: tilda - a threading macro full of itself

> I like this. Reminds me of `rackjure/threading`, but more involved. A few years ago, after Alexis released https://github.com/lexi-lambda/threading I updated rackjure to re-provide that. Speaking of which, a couple issues there might be interesting for you, Vlad. For example, it's better

Re: [racket-users] tilda - a threading macro full of itself

> > It just names the threaded value. Did I overlook anything? That's right, nothing fancy. Think let-binding the threaded value at that point. #:with id ~ would achieve the same thing, so as it is now #:as is redundant. With #:do both #:with and #:as are redundant, really. > Let me point o

[racket-users] Re: tilda - a threading macro full of itself

I like this. Reminds me of `rackjure/threading`, but more involved. -- 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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To

Re: [racket-users] tilda - a threading macro full of itself

> > It just names the threaded value. Did I overlook anything? That's right, nothing fancy. Think let-binding the threaded value at that point. #:with id ~ would achieve the same thing, so as it is now #:as is redundant. With #:do both #:with and #:as are redundant, really. > Let me point o

Re: [racket-users] https://lists.racket-lang.org/ is throwing a security exception

No worries, just figured I'd pass it along. Thanks for the rapid fix. On Mon, May 6, 2019 at 12:59 PM Stephen Chang wrote: > https for lists.racket-lang is not working at the moment. Sorry for > the inconvenience. The server hosting lists.racket-lang went down > recently. A partial temporary no

Re: [racket-users] tilda - a threading macro full of itself

> On May 7, 2019, at 9:39 AM, zeRusski wrote: > > I asked in a separate thread how one debugs set of scopes in Racket macros. I > appreciate the question may read a bit hand-wavy and abstract, so I split out > the piece of code I had in mind into a separate package so that interested > Rack

[racket-users] tilda - a threading macro full of itself

I asked in a separate thread how one debugs set of scopes in Racket macros. I appreciate the question may read a bit hand-wavy and abstract, so I split out the piece of code I had in mind into a separate package so that interest

Re: [racket-users] how do you read, manipulate, debug scope sets?

Thanks Matthew I'll have a look > > All: I published a link to the code I had in mind in a separate thread , so if interested check it out. I don't want to pollute this one if someone takes on the challenge of answering in more ge