This claims to be pretty cross-platform: http://libusb.info/
--
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+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more
Hi all,
Any ideas on how to portably get the product and vendor ID for USB devices
in a Racket app?
Long-and-short, I'd like to be able to find a micro:bit when plugged in, so
I can open a serial port and talk to the MicroPython REPL.
Many thanks,
Matt
--
You received this message because you
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 03:43:42PM -0400, David Christiansen wrote:
> > It would probably cause trouble iif we ever were to generalize to
> > dependent types.
>
> Sure, but those same problems will be there anyway if the compile-time
> and run-time bindings live in separate namespaces and are
Given the quality and depth of prior comments in this thread, I'm a
little reluctant to chime in. I suppose, however, that people on this
list tend to be forgiving and maybe my much less elegant solution will
be helpful, at least as inspiration. This solution is not originally
intended for the
> Ultimately, though, that would mean that it would separate the runtime
> value and type namespaces, but now types and users’ phase 1 bindings
> would share the same namespace, which is still probably confusing and
> unintuitive. Maybe that’s okay? Again, I feel like I’d need to
> understand
> It would probably cause trouble iif we ever were to generalize to
> dependent types.
Sure, but those same problems will be there anyway if the compile-time
and run-time bindings live in separate namespaces and are allowed to
bind the same identifier to different things, as is done in languages
On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 11:59:47AM -0400, David Christiansen wrote:
> Hi Alexis,
>
> What about keeping type bindings separate from program bindings as a
> matter of phase? This seems to me to fit in with the Hindley-Milner
> program, where types exist only at compile time only, and programs
>
> On Oct 15, 2017, at 08:59, David Christiansen
> wrote:
>
> What about keeping type bindings separate from program bindings as a
> matter of phase? This seems to me to fit in with the Hindley-Milner
> program, where types exist only at compile time only, and programs
Hi Alexis,
What about keeping type bindings separate from program bindings as a
matter of phase? This seems to me to fit in with the Hindley-Milner
program, where types exist only at compile time only, and programs
exist at run time only.
/David
--
You received this message because you are
Thank you for your reply, Professor Felleisen.
I have followed your suggestion and have submitted a bug report.
I would like to thank you for writing and making available 'Htdp'.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe
10 matches
Mail list logo