[racket-users] Re: define/contract for private functions

I propose to use submodules like in https://github.com/Kalimehtar/binary-class/blob/master/binary-class/base.rkt So you may in test module (require mod/safe) and in normal operation (require mod). вторник, 23 июля 2019 г., 21:08:15 UTC+5 пользователь Ryan Kramer написал: > > I've found myself

Re: [racket-users] Re: Using errortrace with repl-driven-development?

In DrRacket, the "preserve stack trace" button actually corresponds to a mode in the compiler that disables some optimizations [*]. The radio buttons at the top (specifically the debugging one) control errortrace. Robby [*]

[racket-users] Re: Using errortrace with repl-driven-development?

If you are using DrRacket, you can go to the "Language/Choose Language..." menu, click on "Show Details", than make sure the "Preserve Stack Trace" checkbox is ticked. If you are using racket-mode in Emacs, you can evaluate the current buffer using "C-u F5" which will do the same thing. If

Re: [racket-users] Re: Racket2 possibilities

I thought one of the most compelling parts of Matthew's proposal was at around 37:41 in the video , when he said, I've seen students in my class genuinely struggle with just the syntax. I think it would be very useful to hear more (from Matthew

[racket-users] Re: Using errortrace with repl-driven-development?

Would using 'racket/trace' be a valid way to do this? (require racket/trace) (define (foo) ...) (trace foo) ;; in repl (foo) then ,bt Would it be correct to say that the error traces functionality has been delegated to libraries in order to make things more flexible? (Rather than baked

[racket-users] Re: Message in the meantime?

On Tuesday, July 23, 2019 at 9:28:53 PM UTC-4, Alex Harsanyi wrote: > > > On Wednesday, July 24, 2019 at 12:55:40 AM UTC+8, Greg Hendershott wrote: >> >> Although I'm still skeptical that changing the surface syntax will be a >> sufficiently big net gain, and ought to be the next, highest

[racket-users] Using errortrace with repl-driven-development?

I've been trying to find a way to get better error messages in the racket repl via the command line. Specifically, better stack traces. At the moment, if you load a file in the repl via ',enter' it doesn't give you any information about the line number for errors. I've looked around in the

Re: [racket-users] Interoperability between Racket & Chez Scheme

At Tue, 23 Jul 2019 18:08:46 -0700 (PDT), Brian Adkins wrote: > For example, if I wrote a Chez Scheme library, how would I use that > from w/in some Racket code I wrote? After you get Chez Scheme's `eval`, you can do whatever you need at the Chez Scheme level. That includes loading Chez Scheme

[racket-users] Re: Message in the meantime?

On Wednesday, July 24, 2019 at 12:55:40 AM UTC+8, Greg Hendershott wrote: > > Although I'm still skeptical that changing the surface syntax will be a > sufficiently big net gain, and ought to be the next, highest priority? > I'm running with that idea for the following. > I had a look at the

Re: [racket-users] Interoperability between Racket & Chez Scheme

On Tuesday, July 23, 2019 at 8:52:36 PM UTC-4, Matthew Flatt wrote: > > At Tue, 23 Jul 2019 17:14:56 -0700 (PDT), Brian Adkins wrote: > > With the Racket on Chez Scheme implementation, how interoperable are > Racket > > and Chez? Is it possible for Racket functions to call Chez functions (or >

[racket-users] Re: Message in the meantime?

On Tuesday, July 23, 2019 at 12:55:40 PM UTC-4, Greg Hendershott wrote: > > Although I'm still skeptical that changing the surface syntax will be a > sufficiently big net gain, and ought to be the next, highest priority? > I'm running with that idea for the following. > > It seems like there

Re: [racket-users] Interoperability between Racket & Chez Scheme

At Tue, 23 Jul 2019 17:14:56 -0700 (PDT), Brian Adkins wrote: > With the Racket on Chez Scheme implementation, how interoperable are Racket > and Chez? Is it possible for Racket functions to call Chez functions (or > vice versa) directly w/o using a FFI? If so, can you point me to some >

Re: [racket-users] Re: Racket v7.3.0.900 is available for testing

At Tue, 23 Jul 2019 17:47:35 -0700 (PDT), Alex Harsanyi wrote: > I installed the windows version of the Racket CS build and, when trying to > run DrRacket I get the following error in a console: > > variable force-unfasl is not bound This is a build problem that we're investigating. Thanks for

[racket-users] Re: Racket v7.3.0.900 is available for testing

I installed the windows version of the Racket CS build and, when trying to run DrRacket I get the following error in a console: variable force-unfasl is not bound context...: condition->exn body of data dynamic-wind body of data

[racket-users] Interoperability between Racket & Chez Scheme

With the Racket on Chez Scheme implementation, how interoperable are Racket and Chez? Is it possible for Racket functions to call Chez functions (or vice versa) directly w/o using a FFI? If so, can you point me to some documentation? If not, how difficult would it be to make this happen?

[racket-users] On Fire and Brimstone, Gnashing of Teeth, and the Death of All that is Holy

This is getting out of hand. There is a lot of misinformation swirling around, sparking a lot of unnecessary panic and misunderstanding. Changing surface syntax, even for something as invasive as infix notation, is not synonymous with abandoning s-expressions. Let me repeat this, for emphasis:

Re: [racket-users] Language-Specific Plugins: Toolbar button functionality to call drracket:eval:expand-program

On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 11:35 AM Thomas Dickerson wrote: > Yes - the architecture we eventually settled on is a main submodule that does > roughly this to get a black-box value which we can pass back to a rendering > function to produce a gl-bitmap, and stick it in a snip. > > By the way - it

[racket-users] Re: Racket2 possibilities

My personal big wish is "standard library" consistency and futures(like more extended date-time functions). Another big wish is typed system. Typed racket looks like a BIG step forward, and gives real benefits, it is shame it have not so much support. Another wish is more fluid transition

Re: [racket-users] Scribble timing

On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 12:25:22PM -0600, Matthew Flatt wrote: > > At Thu, 18 Jul 2019 12:28:53 -0400, Hendrik Boom wrote: > > > Did some measurements. > > > > > > 800K of text, represented as 80 scribble files each of 10K bytes, > > > each included using @include-section from one file: > > > 7

Re: [racket-users] Message in the meantime?

I want to take a further step back, and say it would help for everyone to be really-super-clear on what's motivating Racket2, and what we really want to accomplish.  (I know a good effort has already been made, but I get the impression not everyone has the same idea yet, and I think even more

Re: [racket-users] The case, and a proposal, for elegant syntax in #lang racket2

Hi, I would appreciate any advice with combining and using Racket and Jupyter Notebook, if somebody has used these two. Thanks, Arie On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 3:58 PM Matthew Flatt wrote: > At Fri, 19 Jul 2019 08:54:41 -0700 (PDT), Brian Adkins wrote: > > This may seem like a nitpick, but I

[racket-users] Message in the meantime?

Although I'm still skeptical that changing the surface syntax will be a sufficiently big net gain, and ought to be the next, highest priority? I'm running with that idea for the following. It seems like there are at least two "flavors" or "strengths", of giving Racket a non-sexpr syntax someday:

Re: [racket-users] Language-Specific Plugins: Toolbar button functionality to call drracket:eval:expand-program

On Tuesday, July 23, 2019 at 12:35:27 PM UTC-4, Thomas Dickerson wrote: > > > Yes - the architecture we eventually settled on is a main submodule that > does roughly this to get a black-box value which we can pass back to a > rendering function to produce a gl-bitmap, and stick it in a snip. >

Re: [racket-users] Language-Specific Plugins: Toolbar button functionality to call drracket:eval:expand-program

On Tuesday, July 23, 2019 at 2:34:47 AM UTC-4, Robby Findler wrote: > > Sorry for letting this thread lapse. Wrt to your third option > mentioned below, would it work to make that option accessible via the > FFI? If so, then maybe you could make the "essentially phase shifted > everything"

Re: [racket-users] Re: Racket2 possibilities

A couple thoughts, not particularly well-organized, but in a more accessible form here than just tweeting at Alexis. In all this discussion of "parens-less LISP", I find it slightly odd that nobody has mentioned Logo yet. I'm ambivalent about surface syntax, but it's not like this is a

Re: [racket-users] define/contract for private functions

> When I want to enable these private contracts (e.g. when running tests or > debugging a problem) I simply change the source code of `def/c` so that it > is wired up to `define/contract` and the contract is checked. Here is an > example: http://pasterack.org/pastes/4224 You can run arbitrary

[racket-users] define/contract for private functions

I've found myself wanting to write contracts on private functions, but I don't want to pay the performance cost during normal operation. What I've been doing is making a `def/c` macro which looks exactly like `define/contract` but is wired up to `define` and discards the contract. When I want

Re: [racket-users] Scribble reinstallation

On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 09:25:35PM -0400, Ben Greenman wrote: > You should be able to keep the current Racket, > download a snapshot build, > and run the `/bin/drracket` inside the snapshot > > https://www.cs.utah.edu/plt/snapshots/ So I would install one of the snapshots and use it instead

[racket-users] Racket v7.3.0.900 is available for testing

Version 7.3.0.900 is now available for testing from https://pre-release.racket-lang.org/ (Note that this is not available from the usual download site.) If all goes well, we will turn this version into a v7.4 release within a couple of weeks. This release is the first

Re: [racket-users] https://github.com/racket/racket2-rfcs/blob/master/prior-art.md

Thanks, will look into doing that when I get home maybe. As for Heresy2, it's not off the cards, but I kinda want to see how the Racket version shakes out because I might just be duplicating effort for something that won't actually be very fun for me. We'll see what happens. On Tue, Jul 23, 2019

Re: [racket-users] Re: Racket2 possibilities

The second comment by slaymaker1907 is more progressive and closer to the truth no doubt. I merely meant to say that it does feel odd to take off parens off such a great scheme/lisp. But if there’s an elegant way to do it while maintaining all its power AND making it more approachable, all

Re: [racket-users] Re: Racket2 possibilities

Dexter Lagan wrote on 7/23/19 3:32 AM: Like the first HN comment said, Currently 71 comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20490423 FWIW, due to how the HN post was done, I don't know how representative the comments are of professional developers.  The link was posted around 5pm

Re: [racket-users] https://github.com/racket/racket2-rfcs/blob/master/prior-art.md

No problem :) > Not sure where to submit this to that list, Just submit a PR - that’s what I did.(I’m not in the Racket team - I just submitted a PR and it was quickly approved by a member of There are many relevant issues, but maybe this one in the first instance;

Fwd: [racket-users] https://github.com/racket/racket2-rfcs/blob/master/prior-art.md

Forgot to send this to the actual list (sorry Stephen!). Some other thoughts that come to mind are WebAssembly, which has an S-expr syntax but is targeted by lots of different non-Lisp langs. As well I think GCC at least used to have some internal S-expr-like intermediate forms for ASTs. I had

Re: [racket-users] Re: Racket2 possibilities

On 22/07/2019 22:42, Breck Yunits wrote: > Aloha folks, > > I had to miss RacketCon this year as we have a new 6 month old at home > and couldn't make the trek out. > > But I would love to lend my efforts to support the initiative to > explore a Racket universe without parens. If folks out there

Re: [racket-users] Directory-specific installation of packages?

I have periodically investigated installing racket packages via gentoo in a dev-racket/package way that matches how python packages are installed (a far saner experience than any of python's native packaging tools). I always hit roadblocks because raco wants to hit an sqlite database that is

Re: [racket-users] Re: Racket2 possibilities

Agreed, parentheses make manipulating code blocks a breeze. Also, I just realized I had confused Crystal with Julia in my initial rant. Made a fool of myself (again). I played with Julia when it reached 1.0 and liked the no-parens yet functional approach. It felt like a lisp in disguise, a

Re: [racket-users] Directory-specific installation of packages?

Hi James Did you have any luck with using homebrew to package and distribute your Racket program? I thought Bottles might be the way to go but I’m not sure: https://docs.brew.sh/Bottles I have two ideas a) add installing racket from homebrew to a bash script that launches your prog b) using the

Re: [racket-users] Racket2 possibilities

As a former Racket user but not a current member of the Racket community, I thought I might toss in my 2c. My reasons for not using Racket are essentially, 1. Parentheses make my head hurt. 2. DrRacket is slow, and VSCode integration is weak. I've heard the "surface syntax doesn't matter"

Re: [racket-users] Re: i18n / srfi-29

> Is it OK to wrap declare-bundle! + store-bundle inside (begin-for-syntax > ...) to make side effect during raco setup? If not, what is preferred way > to do it? Is there any reason not to do it at runtime? This[1] is what I do in forms-lib. Other modules depend on that module so the bundles

[racket-users] Re: i18n / srfi-29

Is it OK to wrap declare-bundle! + store-bundle inside (begin-for-syntax ...) to make side effect during raco setup? If not, what is preferred way to do it? понедельник, 22 июля 2019 г., 15:56:13 UTC+5 пользователь Roman Klochkov написал: > > Hello! > > I'm trying to use srfi/29. As far as I

Re: [racket-users] Language-Specific Plugins: Toolbar button functionality to call drracket:eval:expand-program

Sorry for letting this thread lapse. Wrt to your third option mentioned below, would it work to make that option accessible via the FFI? If so, then maybe you could make the "essentially phase shifted everything" into "actually phase shifted everything" and then when you get the result program