Hi all,
This is a bit difficult to explain, so bear with me.
I have a very simple macro which generates a runtime call to a normal
function. The macro is so the arguments can be [more or less] free
form expressions - the runtime function is because the computations
are not simple and some of the
This is really cool, thanks for writing about it and sharing it! And thanks
for showing me another book I ought to get around to reading.
There were some very interesting talks last weekend at RacketCon 2017
related to logic programming, program synthesis, and unification that you
might be inte
Cool. Thank you, Robby and Matthias.
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 9:50 PM, Robby Findler
wrote:
> If you want to know what the current racket does (not what the
> chez-based one does), then you can "raco make x.rkt" and then "raco
> decompile x.rkt" to see what is going on.
>
> In the cod quoted be
On Friday, October 13, 2017 at 1:06:15 PM UTC-4, Alexis King wrote:
>
> At this point, though it is indisputably evil, it seems more feasible
> to use some name mangling scheme than to expand to a submodule. That
> would be, of course, deeply unsatisfying, so I would very much like to
> have a b
If you want to know what the current racket does (not what the
chez-based one does), then you can "raco make x.rkt" and then "raco
decompile x.rkt" to see what is going on.
In the cod quoted below, no closures are allocated because all of the
functions bar, baz, and jaz are eliminated before runti
> On Oct 13, 2017, at 9:19 PM, David Storrs wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Matthias Felleisen
> wrote:
>>
>>> On Oct 13, 2017, at 2:55 PM, David Storrs wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 2:50 PM, David Storrs
>>> wrote:
Coming from a Perl background, I've long had a c
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Matthias Felleisen
wrote:
>
>> On Oct 13, 2017, at 2:55 PM, David Storrs wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 2:50 PM, David Storrs wrote:
>>> Coming from a Perl background, I've long had a convention of naming
>>> private functions with a leading underscore, e.g
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Robby Findler
wrote:
> Also: if you just don't `provide` a function from a module, then it
> cannot be used outside. No naming conventions necessary.
>
Sure, but the underscore helps me know at a glance what I'm looking
at, whether it's safe to make a breaking cha
I don't think there's a convention, and I've not yet found an ideal one.
Around 2000, with portable RnRS-ish Scheme absent a module system, I
started using a convention that I think I took from Olin Shivers, which
is to prefix non-public toplevel identifiers with `%`. (At one point, I
even ha
Robby Findler writes:
> Also: if you just don't `provide` a function from a module, then it
> cannot be used outside. No naming conventions necessary.
But the no-naming convention is necessary.
:-).
--
---
Eric Eide
Doh! Ok, it’s me. I don’t know why I assumed table-panel was included out of
the box.
Thank you Dmitry!
Geoff Knauth (mobile)Ты
> On Oct 13, 2017, at 14:59, Dmitry Pavlov wrote:
>
>
>
>> #lang racket/gui
>> (require table-panel)
>>
>> leads to:
>>
>> standard-module-name-resolver: colle
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 2:27 PM Andrew Gwozdziewycz
wrote:
> I love seeing all of these project ideas, but I really don't think
> Racket needs a "killer app." I think what it needs is the people
> passionate about it building tools in it, and *using* those tools in
> the work place, and sharing t
Hi all,
I am porting the Prolog interpreter shown in Peter Norvig's classic text on
AI, "Paradigms of Artificial Intelligence Programming: Case Studies in
Common Lisp 1st Edition",
https://www.amazon.com/Paradigms-Artificial-Intelligence-Programming-Studies/dp/1558601910/,
also known as PAIP,
#lang racket/gui
(require table-panel)
leads to:
standard-module-name-resolver: collection not found
Have you tried raco pkg install table-panel?
Best regards,
Dmitry
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket
Users" group.
To unsubscribe from th
Also: if you just don't `provide` a function from a module, then it
cannot be used outside. No naming conventions necessary.
Robby
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 1:57 PM, Matthias Felleisen
wrote:
>
>> On Oct 13, 2017, at 2:55 PM, David Storrs wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 2:50 PM, David Storrs
> On Oct 13, 2017, at 2:55 PM, David Storrs wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 2:50 PM, David Storrs wrote:
>> Coming from a Perl background, I've long had a convention of naming
>> private functions with a leading underscore, e.g. _do-the-thing. Is
>> there a standard Racket convention for th
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 2:50 PM, David Storrs wrote:
> Coming from a Perl background, I've long had a convention of naming
> private functions with a leading underscore, e.g. _do-the-thing. Is
> there a standard Racket convention for this and, if so, what is it?
Addendum: I know that I can defi
Coming from a Perl background, I've long had a convention of naming
private functions with a leading underscore, e.g. _do-the-thing. Is
there a standard Racket convention for this and, if so, what is it?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users"
Is it me, or is it Friday the 13th? (Or both?)
#lang racket/gui
(require table-panel)
leads to:
standard-module-name-resolver: collection not found
for module path: table-panel
collection: "table-panel"
in collection directories:
/Users/me/Library/Racket/snapshot/collects
/Applicati
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 09:07:48AM +1100, Daniel Prager wrote:
> Great topic!
>
> Providing examples and tutorials around data analysis and visualisation in
> Racket (and filling gaps and simplifying) gets my vote.
The biggest problem wth almost all free software is documentation.
Sometimes it's
This is a cool demo! Unfortunately, I have been thinking about the
problem you describe since last night, and I am still totally stumped.
This is something that seems difficult or impossible to paper over with
more macros because #%require and #%provide are, ultimately, given
special treatment by t
In this case, I'm thinking of the unfortunate JVM error messages from
Clojure. As far as I know, the main reason to suffer through Clojure's
attachment to the JVM is that no other Lisp has the same level of
support for web applications.
The second reason may be something about performance, but we
On Oct 13, 2017, at 9:44 AM, 'Royall Spence' via Racket Users wrote:
> Since we're bikeshedding here, I think we'd benefit from having a web
> toolkit on par with Clojure's Luminus. We only need a few more packages,
> a website documenting their interoperation, and a project skeleton to
> create
In my experience, it means two seemingly opposite things that unify to
create bad software. On the one hand, it's an extreme conservatism and
fear of attempting new things. Don't try a new language, just keep using
PHP. Don't install the new PHP version with better features, it could be
risky. Don'
So someone should organize a loosely connected group to port the core of Racket
to the JVM:
— racket
— the macro system
— all non-GUI libraries
and provide a Clojure-style way to leverage the GUI libraries.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 2:27 AM, Eric Griffis wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 9:31 AM David Storrs wrote:
>>
> Web dev culture is a bigger issue.
>
> Eric
How so?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this grou
26 matches
Mail list logo
