It's usually called "binding pair". See also
https://docs.racket-lang.org/syntax/stxparse-intro.html which defines a
syntax class describing the said structure.
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 10:25 AM David Storrs
wrote:
> Racket has a number of forms that include what look like lists of lists
> but
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 1:40 PM Sorawee Porncharoenwase <
sorawee.pw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It's usually called "binding pair". See also
> https://docs.racket-lang.org/syntax/stxparse-intro.html which defines a
> syntax class describing the said structure.
>
Okay, but what about in
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 1:49 PM Jay McCarthy wrote:
> I think the word you're looking for is "syntax". Many people think that
> languages like Racket "don't have syntax" or "have uniform syntax", but
> this is an example of how that is incorrect. Each macro has its own unique
> syntax and this
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 2:45 PM David Storrs wrote:
> Offtopic question for someone else: Jay, are you related to
> Lisp-inventory John McCarthy?
>
Nope, although we have the same name and nickname
Jay
--
Jay McCarthy
Associate Professor @ CS @ UMass Lowell
http://jeapostrophe.github.io
Racket has a number of forms that include what look like lists of lists but
are not. For example: (let ((foo 7) (bar 8)) ...)
What would the '(foo 7)' and '(bar 8)' elements be called? Groups, maybe?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users"
Hey everyone,
I was working on a procedure to prompt the user for confirmation and found
something a bit strange - it did not appear to read for input when usingt
"racket -i" or in the Emacs Racket REPL buffer. Here is the code:
(define (yn #:read-one-char? [read-one-char? #f])
(display "y/n:
An answer to a third question that might also have been the one that was
asked :)
You might call it a "sequence".
Robby
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 12:50 PM Jay McCarthy
wrote:
> I think the word you're looking for is "syntax". Many people think that
> languages like Racket "don't have syntax"
I think I wouldn’t say “accepts”; I usually reserve this term for functions,
but that’s a minor quibble.
I think I would call these “clauses”, as in
“With-handlers allows the user to specify exception-handling clauses. Each one
includes two parts: a predicate, indicating whether blah blah
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 2:37 PM John Clements
wrote:
> I think I wouldn’t say “accepts”; I usually reserve this term for
> functions, but that’s a minor quibble.
>
> I think I would call these “clauses”, as in
>
> “With-handlers allows the user to specify exception-handling clauses. Each
> one
I think the word you're looking for is "syntax". Many people think that
languages like Racket "don't have syntax" or "have uniform syntax", but
this is an example of how that is incorrect. Each macro has its own unique
syntax and this is an example of how `let` has a unique syntax where `(`
does
The dev team will have to answer your actual question, but I thought I
might offer a more compact solution that incorporates the fix you mentioned:
(define (yn #:read-one-char? [read-one-char? #f])
(display "y/n: ")
(flush-output (current-output-port))
(define func (if read-one-char?
Another approach is to give it a name in the documentation and use that
name (following Jay's earlier message).
Robby
On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 1:37 PM 'John Clements' via Racket Users <
racket-users@googlegroups.com> wrote:
> I think I wouldn’t say “accepts”; I usually reserve this term for
>
Looks very fun. :)
Ryan Kramer writes:
> I've just released v0.1 of a falling block video game:
> https://github.com/default-kramer/fission-flare It draws a lot of
> inspiration from Dr Mario but I don't like to advertise that since my
> game has plenty of unique ideas. And although the patent
13 matches
Mail list logo
