Re: [racket-users] RCP over racket-stomp

I have installed a RabbitMQ server for Liitin project (http://liitin.org) to develop and test various messaging possibilities between users and various devices and services (Internet of Things). So far I have a very small toy program to publish and subscribe to dummy notifications. Now I'd like

[racket-users] Racket PPA updated for 6.2

Hi all, For the Ubuntu users here, I've updated the Racket PPA for 6.2: https://launchpad.net/~plt/+archive/ubuntu/racket I've tested it only on Vivid, so let me know if you find any issues. And as usual thanks to the Debian maintainers who did 99% of the actual work for this. Cheers, Asumu

Re: [racket-users] RCP over racket-stomp

On 08/06/2015 02:03 PM, Jukka Tuominen wrote: From a generic STOMP documentation I’ve understood that I should send a ”reply-to” header item with a temporary queue value, but I’m not sure about the format I should use in racket-stomp. I tried... #:headers `((receipt ,receipt)(persistent

Re: [racket-users] Re: is this a bug?

'ormap' http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/pairs.html?q=ormap#%28def._%28%28lib._racket%2Fprivate%2Fmap..rkt%29._ormap%29%29 or 'for/or' http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/for.html?q=for%2For#%28form._%28%28lib._racket%2Fprivate%2Fbase..rkt%29._for%2For%29%29 may be useful to you. On Thu,

Re: [racket-users] is this a bug?

I believe this pull request is about solving that problem: https://github.com/plt/racket/pull/928 Either through modifying `and` and `or`, or providing variations that can be used with apply and foldr (or other higher-order functions). On Aug 6, 2015, at 10:09 AM, sagyo12341...@gmail.com wrote:

Re: [racket-users] Distinct instantiations of modules

I think namespace-attach-module is one way to do this: #lang racket (module a racket (define ns (make-base-namespace)) (namespace-attach-module (current-namespace) 'racket/promise ns) (parameterize ((current-namespace ns)) (namespace-require 'racket)) (define *promise?

[racket-users] Re: is this a bug?

In racket, the proc apply-or is needed. (or #f 1 2 #f 3 4 #f) 1 (apply or (list #f 1 2 #f 3 4 #f)) . or: bad syntax in: or (define (apply-or lst) (foldr or #t lst)) . or: bad syntax in: or (define (apply-or lst) (foldr (lambda (x y) (or x y)) #t lst)) (apply-or (list #f 1 2 #f 3 4 #t)) 1

Re: [racket-users] is this a bug?

No, it's syntax. On Aug 6, 2015, at 11:09 AM, sagyo12341...@gmail.com wrote: In racket, the proc apply-or is needed. (or #f 1 2 #f 3 4 #f) 1 (apply or (list #f 1 2 #f 3 4 #f)) . or: bad syntax in: or (define (apply-or lst) (foldr or #t lst)) . or: bad syntax in: or (define (apply-or