I generally use DrRacket for all my Racket dev because it "just works
(tm)". I have sometimes used other editors for it, and the main things I
miss from those usually are autocomplete (DrR has this but it's always been
way too slow for me so I never turn it on), more detailed syntax
highlighting
Le Monday 27 November 2017 05:18:02 pm David Storrs, vous avez écrit :
>
> > 2. The macro stepper is extremely handy when it works, and being able to
> > inspect syntax objects in the interactions pane is wonderful when the
> > macro stepper doesn't work.
>
> Offtopic: This is the one big
documentation (albeit limited) on the macro stepper:
http://docs.racket-lang.org/macro-debugger/index.html#%28part._.Using_the_.Macro_.Stepper%29
You can also find `expand/step` there, which I find to be a very useful
complement to using DrRacket to step through the expansion of an entire
module.
On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 9:13 PM, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> Does the following do something like you want?
>
> Subject: single-file packages and embedded documentation and metadata
> Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2017 23:04:39 -0500
>
On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 09:48:16AM +, Robby Findler wrote:
> It may help to disable online compilation. (Click on the little circle in
> the bottom to get a menu that lets you disable it.)
Ah! Thanks for the suggestion; I'll give that a try.
Richard
--
You received this message because
I use Emacs because org-mode provides Babel and Babel lets me program in a
literate style. In Emacs I can write literate code irrespective of
language and I enjoy literate programming more than
illiterate/unlitterate/conventional programming by a wide margin. Emacs
org-mode lets me convert my
On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 12:43 PM, David Thrane Christiansen
wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
>> I’ve noticed some list members use other editors or IDE’s.
>>
>> I know two big reasons for using a complex tool is it’s stickiness factors;
>> normally a combination of familiarity
On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 12:10 AM, Greg Hendershott
wrote:
> As another example of using scribble/srcdoc, for Frog I made a
> `define-doc` macro:
>
>
> https://github.com/greghendershott/frog/blob/master/frog/private/define-doc.rkt
>
> Example usage:
>
>
I mostly like the text navigation features I have in Emacs. I also like
that I can run a shell inside Emacs and manage multiple buffers easily.
Installing different color themes is easy too, while in DrRacket I would
probably have to configure the colors myself (I might be wrong though, not
Sometimes I find myself thinking: "I should really write some tests for all
of this!"
But then I ask myself: "Uhm, how can I test some of the inner procedures of
this procedure?"
I sometimes use inner procedures when no other part of the code needs
access to some procedure and it fits
I don't think you can directly test an inner procedure while keeping your
test code separately loadable (e.g. different file or module). It doesn't
seem like a good idea to me, personally. Inner procedures communicate to me
that I can change, reorganize, delete, and otherwise do whatever I want
I don’t want to stop the responses, but I do want to say thank you to all
of you. You have given me a lot to think about.
Kind regards,
Stephen
--
Kind regards,
Stephen
--
Ealing (London), UK
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
On 11/27/2017 3:30 PM, Zelphir Kaltstahl wrote:
Memory limits can be easily added to a program as well with the
following code:
~~~
(define (Mb-to-B n) (* n 1024 1024))
(define MAX-BYTES (Mb-to-B 128))
(custodian-limit-memory (current-custodian) MAX-BYTES)
~~~
The problem with
i use emacs with all Scheme implementations and also for Racket,when debugging
i can use the racket editor that display information about trace calls
but i still modify in emacs and refresh only in DrRacket, in emacs i appeciate
the syntax highlighting and the search and replace fast short-cuts
It may help to disable online compilation. (Click on the little circle in
the bottom to get a menu that lets you disable it.)
Robby
On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 9:21 PM Richard Cobbe wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 26, 2017 at 03:42:14PM +, Stephen De Gabrielle wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >
Hi Ben,
Your guess seems reasonable.
The empty line does not appear when I put the comment in one long line,
but this is ugly.
Defining the comment outside the definition works well,
so I'll use this hack as follows:
@elemtag["rearrangement" "Not important."]
@(define my-comment
(list
Huh, that looks reasonable.
So far I've not used modules much, except the implicit one by:
~~~
#lang racket
~~~
So the example is helpful.
The tests are not in another file, but at least they are not inside a
wrapping procedure and are in a way separate.
Maybe I should have a look at the
+1. Totally agree.
> On Nov 27, 2017, at 1:15 PM, Jack Firth wrote:
>
> I don't think you can directly test an inner procedure while keeping your
> test code separately loadable (e.g. different file or module). It doesn't
> seem like a good idea to me, personally. Inner
18 matches
Mail list logo