Re: [racket-users] running racket command line, load mode works but module mode doesnt

Hi, I try to help and hope I do not mess things up. I found those start up things a bit tricky as well. The main question is: What is available when you want to eval with the -e option? (more technically: what bindings does your current namespace provide at that point?) The concept of

Re: [racket-users] help on coding finite state automata

Thank you very much, Im trying to see it. However Im very unfamiliar with module in racket. So far I can only answer you this: about your comment > [define survivors (drop population speed)] > ;; MF: THIS LOOKS LIKE IT MAY "RESURRECT" AUTOM. THAT ARE ALIVE > [define successors

Re: [racket-users] running racket command line, load mode works but module mode doesnt

Dear Daniel, thank you for your answer, I have a sample code that I describe the same problem here in this thread (the last post of mine, you dont need to read the whole thread) including what command in which nested module I want to call:

Re: [racket-users] help on coding finite state automata

ok i've been trying to see through the code. I'm not sure how github works but I pushed the changes in my repo again (https://github.com/ayaderaghul/sample-fsm/blob/master/fsm0.rkt). Basically, I rewrite the automaton module (description and behavior) because previously I made a confusion

Re: [racket-users] running racket command line, load mode works but module mode doesnt

Dear Daniel, I have blindly tried and so far these two things work for me: 1. Add this to the end of the file (maybe module* main #f...) ``` (module+ main (hello) ) ``` and then "racket -t foo.rkt" prints "Hello, world!". 2. If you want to use "-e" (e.g. for testing) you need more

Re: [racket-users] Naming for generalization of find-min and find-max?

Find-best is right to me. The "best" under < is the most negative number. Find-maximal is also okay and slightly more accurate. Robby On Sunday, October 11, 2015, Alex Knauth wrote: > Hi, > > Alexis King and I were discussing adding versions of argmin and argmax to > the

Re: [racket-users] help on coding finite state automata

Sorry for the emails. But I'd like to post that the question of how to require a module then evaluate a command is answered here: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/racket-users/byL7W1yktas by Daniel. Thank you so much for all your help and patience, chi -- You received this message

Re: [racket-users] Naming for generalization of find-min and find-max?

'leftmost' or 'rightmost'? Or 'find-leftmost' 'find-rightmost'? I dunno, maybe those are more confusing. They seem to hint at the right idea to me (at least as it relates to argument order and the relation). On Sun, Oct 11, 2015, 6:25 PM Alex Knauth wrote: > Hi, > > Alexis

[racket-users] Re: Naming for generalization of find-min and find-max?

On Sunday, October 11, 2015 at 6:24:57 PM UTC-4, Alex Knauth wrote: > Hi, > > The problem was naming it. We thought of `find-best` and > `find-most-relevant`, but `find-best` would be confusing when it's being used > to find the worst case, and `find-most-relevant` seems better but to wordy.  >

Re: [racket-users] Naming for generalization of find-min and find-max?

What about "find-min-by"/"find-max-by"?  (Or, if it's more standard Rackety style, "find-min/by" and "find-max/by", where the slash denotes a variant of an otherwise common function...) Ben On 10/11/2015 6:24 PM, Alex Knauth wrote:

Re: [racket-users] Naming for generalization of find-min and find-max?

argbest > On Oct 11, 2015, at 6:24 PM, Alex Knauth wrote: > > Hi, > > Alexis King and I were discussing adding versions of argmin and argmax to the > alexis/collection library, but we agreed that find-min and find-max were > clearer names. Then we came up with a

Re: [racket-users] Representing invalid values for non-negative integer variables

The Scheme convention for absence of a value, inherited by Racket, is to use #f since it is the only falsy value. This make it easy to branch on the presence or absence of a value. Typed Racket reinforces this convention: it has an (Option t) type constructor that is an alias for (U t #f),

Re: [racket-users] above/beside

If memory serves, this is to cater for beginning students for whom passing a single image is more often than not an error. I (and no doubt others) have written functions above* and beside* to do "the right thing". Dan -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

Re: [racket-users] Naming for generalization of find-min and find-max?

My responses to Robby Findler, Andrew Kent, JCG, Ben Lerner, and Matthias Felleisen: Something I should have said before: I want this to be one abstraction over both find-min and find-max. > On Oct 11, 2015, at 6:29 PM, Robby Findler > wrote: > > Find-best is

Re: [racket-users] Naming for generalization of find-min and find-max?

> On Oct 11, 2015, at 10:00 PM, Alex Knauth wrote: > > Um, ok. If we were making the naming consistent with argmin and argmax, that > would be good. But we renamed those to find-min and find-max because we > thought arg... was confusing. I know we try not to be confusing

[racket-users] Re: help on coding finite state automata

Chi, if you have really like finite state automata, you might be interested in a new product from Micron called the Automata Processor (AP) http://www.micronautomata.com. A single chip has (I think) 256K fsa elements operating in massive parallelism. It's particularly designed for things like

Re: [racket-users] help on coding finite state automata

I have pushed some more cleanups, more speed. I added another question to the “spawning” procedure. > On Oct 10, 2015, at 11:06 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote: > > I forked, Racket-ized, and gained some speed (~2x). > > > >> On Sep 6, 2015, at 5:21 AM, Nguyen Linh

[racket-users] Representing invalid values for non-negative integer variables

In my state object for 2htdp, I have entries that are normally natural numbers. When the value of a particular entry is not meaningful during a certain activity, I could just leave the value as whatever it was before, but I would prefer to set it to an invalid value (such as -1 or #f) to

Re: [racket-users] Naming for generalization of find-min and find-max?

> On Oct 11, 2015, at 10:41 PM, Nadeem Abdul Hamid wrote: > find-optimal ? > Originally I thought "optimal = maximal" and I didn't like it because it felt too number-y and too close to max. Robby got me to realize that optimal doesn't imply numbers, and is really closer to