[racket-users] Re: Why is there a space in the path to the Racket application on MacOSX?

Lots of good advice and opinions here. Thanks everyone. I'll try to respond to all of them in some way ... 1. @David K. Storrs and @Eric Eide: Renaming the folder. This works for sure but _my_ preference is to use a symlink (as Eric also mentioned) as it doesn't touch the original folder

[racket-users] Re: Why is there a space in the path to the Racket application on MacOSX?

On Sunday, April 1, 2018 at 12:57:46 PM UTC-4, Stephen Smith wrote: > > It's been a long tough road as to which implementation language to choose > for it. I'm down to two now after much experimenting - Racket of course, > and Smalltalk. > Now you have me wondering which is harder, implementing

[racket-users] Re: Implementation of threading macros

Thanks for your advice, Alex. I'll be used to require point-free package. -- 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] Simple loop control

Hi, everyone. I want to write loops simpler. > (do ([i 1 (add1 i)]) ([= i 10]) (display i)) 123456789 > (for-each (lambda (i) (display i)) (range 1 10)) 123456789 In Common Lisp, I like the extended loop like "for" of C-language. [3]> (loop for i from 1 below 10 do (print i)) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Re: [racket-users] Simple loop control

Take at look at Racket's `for' loops. They are very flexible. The reference: http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/for.html?q=for#%28form._%28%28lib._racket%2Fprivate%2Fbase..rkt%29._for%29%29 The guide with examples: http://docs.racket-lang.org/guide/for.html On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 10:14 AM,

Re: [racket-users] Why is there a space in the path to the Racket application on MacOSX?

Railroad-simulation language, absolutely! One of the key reasons that Racket is on the top of the list. But what I didn't think of was to have the reader use the DSL first. I was initially planning to develop the DSL as a later part of the book - doing it the hard way perhaps. That has always

[racket-users] Smalltalk (Was: Why is there a space in the path to the Racket application on MacOSX?)

Geoffrey Knauth wrote on 04/01/2018 01:05 PM: On Sunday, April 1, 2018 at 12:57:46 PM UTC-4, Stephen Smith wrote: It's been a long tough road as to which implementation language to choose for it. I'm down to two now after much experimenting - Racket of course, and Smalltalk. Now

[racket-users] Re: Smalltalk (Was: Why is there a space in the path to the Racket application on MacOSX?)

On Sunday, April 1, 2018 at 9:53:45 PM UTC-4, Neil Van Dyke wrote: > > A bonus of reading old Smalltalk-80 stuff is that you get exposed to a > bit of some of the best and most optimistic visionary thinking about > information technology, when people had grand ideas for how computers > could

Re: [racket-users] Re: Smalltalk (Was: Why is there a space in the path to the Racket application on MacOSX?)

Geoffrey Knauth wrote on 04/01/2018 11:53 PM: I don't see why there couldn't be a Racket Machine.  People could live in it the way people live in Emacs and get so much done and have their ice cream too. BTW, if someone wants the novelty of a kind of mock-up of booting into a Racket Machine,

[racket-users] Re: Why is there a space in the path to the Racket application on MacOSX?

I don't know where you are going with your book, but are you sure forcing people to use the command-line interface is a good idea? Racket can be fully used through the GUI (even managing packages can be done through DrRacket). I agree with explaining both DrRacket and raco, but why can't users

Re: [racket-users] Why is there a space in the path to the Racket application on MacOSX?

> On Apr 1, 2018, at 12:57 PM, Stephen Smith wrote: > > my (book) project is for model railroad hobbyists (many if not most who have > never programmed before). Have you considered the development of a railroad-simulation language within Racket that fits your

[racket-users] Re: Why is there a space in the path to the Racket application on MacOSX?

You've gone above my pay-grade. :-) On Sunday, April 1, 2018 at 1:05:17 PM UTC-4, Geoffrey Knauth wrote: > > On Sunday, April 1, 2018 at 12:57:46 PM UTC-4, Stephen Smith wrote: >> >> It's been a long tough road as to which implementation language to choose >> for it. I'm down to two now after

[racket-users] Re: Why is there a space in the path to the Racket application on MacOSX?

Hmm, you've got me thinking more now - maybe leave the command-line until later. I certainly don't want to scare them off in the first chapter. I'm so used to installing packages via raco I didn't even think of using DrRacket. On Sunday, April 1, 2018 at 7:18:33 PM UTC-4, HiPhish wrote: > > I