Also, if I remember correctly, the timings given in the said (excellent)
tutorial are very conservative or outdated. If you have a multicore
machine, it will speed up the process by up to a factor 8.
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020, 15:42 Sam Tobin-Hochstadt
wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 9:09 AM Ben
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 9:09 AM Ben Greenman
wrote:
>
> On 4/29/20, Sorawee Porncharoenwase wrote:
> > (Not directly related to Rhombus) Speaking of “how to contribute”, I find
> > that it is not friendly at all to setup stuff in order to contribute to
> > Racket core and main distribution.
On 4/29/20, Sorawee Porncharoenwase wrote:
> (Not directly related to Rhombus) Speaking of “how to contribute”, I find
> that it is not friendly at all to setup stuff in order to contribute to
> Racket core and main distribution. According to
>
I just read myself, I meant runtime errors, not compile-time errors. One big
complain I hear from people used to compiled languages - when they first use
dynamic and interpreter languages - is the idea of having errors occur at
runtime, which ‘should’ have been picked up by the interpreter
(Not directly related to Rhombus) Speaking of “how to contribute”, I find
that it is not friendly at all to setup stuff in order to contribute to
Racket core and main distribution. According to
https://blog.racket-lang.org/2017/09/tutorial-contributing-to-racket.html,
if I want to make a change
At Wed, 29 Apr 2020 12:46:50 -0400, David Storrs wrote:
> In related news, a question for the list: Once I have a handle on this, I
> would like to write a "How to Contribute to Racket Documentation" guide.
> Where would be the right place for this? Should it be an expansion to an
> existing
You’ve always been very inspiring to me. I’ll do my best to better the docs
if there’s a guide on how to do so. Bear with me, I have no background in
computer science and I don’t even know what a pull request is. I only recently
started using version control. I’ve always worked alone, until
See the comment I just left in this PR:
https://github.com/racket/scribble/pull/223
Sam
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 5:10 PM Dexter Lagan wrote:
>
> I’d like to help too, so if I understand this pull request correctly,
> there’s demand for a guide on how to update the docs? I was about to ask
>
I’d like to help too, so if I understand this pull request correctly, there’s
demand for a guide on how to update the docs? I was about to ask precisely
that, how to contribute to the docs. If there’s JavaScript to make, I can take
a look. I don’t use Slack, is there an alternative?
Cheers,
Thanks so much for your reply, it's very nice to see another perspective. I
added specific comments below :
They say that Racket is slow. I would like to know who are "they".
>
Same here, never had a problem, but I do understand there may be
requirements for real-time apps and system
To be clear, I have never had a problem with Racket's performance, I'm
just thinking about ways to push for a wider adoption. Personally, anything
faster than Python is more than enough, especially with a good FFI. I'm
guessing a lot of people look at Rust and Go just because it's supposed to
be
>
>
> They say that Racket is slow. I would like to know who are "they".
>
> Racket can be surprising. For example - our GUI application on RPi has a
> start-up time of 24s... But when we compile it using `raco exe`, it goes
> down under 2s including some hardware setup the program does.
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 11:15 AM Jeffrey Edgington
wrote:
>
> Greetings,
>
> I would be interested as well.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeff
>
>
Sam and I started to do this on Slack and will connect again later to do
more. I'm taking thorough notes and will pass them along once I've got
something worked
Apologies if this is a tired question, and please link me to any answer I
missed.
If Racket is a component of the overall system, does that imply that it can
"reach out" from it's new home in the ecosystem and use all of the new features
available beyond Phase 4?
~slg
‐‐‐ Original
Cool, thanks! Ping sent.
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:27 AM Sam Tobin-Hochstadt
wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> If you ping me on Slack, I'll be happy to walk you through how to make
> changes to the docs. And maybe you can lend a hand to finally
> completing https://github.com/racket/racket/pull/874
Hi,
I can't leave this without reaction...
>
> To the point: what would make Racket2 the ultimate tool (for me):
>
> * Performance. Faster startup times, shorter execution times in
> general. Optionally, a ‘lite’ version of Racket that compiles
> directly to no-deps binaries,
On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 8:21 AM Matthew Flatt wrote:
> At Wed, 29 Apr 2020 11:14:47 +0200, Dexter Lagan wrote:
> > To the point: what would make Racket2 the ultimate tool (for me):
> > Performance. Faster startup times, shorter execution times in general.
> > Optionally, a ‘lite’ version of
At Wed, 29 Apr 2020 11:14:47 +0200, Dexter Lagan wrote:
> To the point: what would make Racket2 the ultimate tool (for me):
> Performance. Faster startup times, shorter execution times in general.
> Optionally, a ‘lite’ version of Racket that compiles directly to no-deps
> binaries, bypassing
Hi all,
I had written a few of my early thoughts about ‘racket2’, but after mulling
over all this for a good year, I’d like to write something more definitive.
My background: I started programming in BASIC on C64, followed by ADA,
Pascal, C and macro-assembly on 8086 with MASM in the 90’s.
I'll throw this in simply so that it's part of this thread. There's
nothing new here, so if you've seen my comments in earlier Racket2 threads
then you can skip this.
I've said before and continue to think that getting rid of the parenthesis
syntax is a major error. It is inarguable that there
Fantastic! In these confusing times, this fills my mind with warmth and
optimism.
> On Oct 2, 2019, at 12:27 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
>
> Rhombus is about building on the good parts of Racket and advancing the
> frontier of Racket-style language-oriented programming. A significant
> part of
[[NOTE: "Rhombus" is the new name for a design project formerly known
as "Racket2", but "Rhombus" IS NOT THE FINAL NAME OF THE NEW LANGUAGE.
"Rhombus" is the name of the project that will develop a language,
and "Rhombus" is a temporary stand-in for a language name to be
determined later.
22 matches
Mail list logo
