Re: [racket-users] Capability security in Racket?

This idea in general is very cool, so do let us (or at least me) know when you've got a prototype working. I'm quite curious to see the inner workings. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop rece

[racket-users] Re: Garbage Collection of Places

On 08/18/2015 08:24 PM, Matthew Flatt wrote: At Mon, 17 Aug 2015 12:21:41 -0700 (PDT), Jack Firth wrote: On Monday, August 17, 2015 at 9:07:15 AM UTC-7, Matthew Flatt wrote: That's an especially basic mistake, and it slipped by because low-level locks are rarely allocated in the run-time system

Re: [racket-users] Capability security in Racket?

Thanks for the pointer, Scott! I had been slowly coming to the conclusion I was going to need to define a #lang, and I'd even run across your paper, though I was holding out hope that there was some kind of shortcut for code running in a sandbox. I definitely like the idea of being able to use "reg

[racket-users] contract error raised in 6.0, but not in 6.1 and 6.2?

Below, I think `(func 42)` should raise exn:fail:contract, because `(func 42)` returns a number and the output contract for `func` specifies a boolean. And in 6.0 it does raise this error. But in 6.1 and 6.2, it does not. Why the discrepancy? #lang racket (provide (contr

[racket-users] Racket Language Track for Exercism

Hi all - I'm adding Racket to exercism.io: http://exercism.io Basically, Exercism is an app where users submit solutions to problems, and receive feedback for said solutions. Exercism currently supports 26 languages, with a minimum of 10 exercises for each language. Most, if not all, languages

Re: [racket-users] DrRacket rendering issues OS X

I've pushed a repair for this problem. The short version is that a workaround for an old OS X bug seems to run into a new OS X bug, but the old OS X bug appears to be fixed in 10.10, so the workaround (and the new bug) can be avoided. At Tue, 18 Aug 2015 20:09:59 +, Andrew Kent wrote: > Just

Re: [racket-users] Capability security in Racket?

Hi Sean, An alternative approach you might consider instead of relying heavily on sandboxes and namespaces is to define your own #lang where you can carefully control how different objects are allowed to communicate with each other. This approach could have two advantages: 1) you can use lighter-w

[racket-users] Re: Garbage Collection of Places

On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 14:42:03 +, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: >You can see the patch here: >https://github.com/plt/racket/commit/641c56b6e95b57881b6fef846fb758ed5cd6e5a8 > >Sam On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 12:08:17 -0600, Matthew Flatt wrote: >At Tue, 18 Aug 2015 10:40:14 -0400, George Neuner wrote: