> On May 29, 2019, at 11:09 AM, Sorawee Porncharoenwase
> wrote:
>
> (foo a) ;=> 1
> (foo "a") ;=> 2
> (foo 10) ;=> 3
> (foo 'a) ;=> 4
> (foo (bar x)) ;=> 5
Ah… thanks so much for the explanation. That’s put me much closer (I hope!) to
the solution I’m after. A bit of stumbling around through
At Wed, 29 May 2019 12:33:24 -0400, George Neuner wrote:
> Question: does/will Chez support converting to/from 32-bit floats for C
> libraries?
Yes.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiv
I support them in various packages, but I rarely use them, per se. Those
packages would have to be updated, but it wouldn't be a big deal for me.
Doug
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 9:52 AM Matthew Flatt wrote:
> Does anyone use single-flonums in Racket?
>
> I don't mean `_float` or `f32vector`s, whic
My guess is that no one uses them currently, because it's rare that
you'd want to trade speed for *im*precision. Single-flonums in Racket
are significantly slower than regular flonums, because they're not
treated as a common case. The only use I can think of, and the one that
inspired the origi
The issue is that #'arg will always be a syntax object. An identifier is a
kind of syntax object, so it makes sense to test (identifier? #’arg).
However, (symbol? #’arg) and (string? #’arg) will always fail.
Suppose then that you invoke the macro with "1" as the operand, it would
fail every case i
#'arg is a syntax object, therefore (number? #'arg) or (string? #'arg) will
always be false. If you are trying to dispatch based on literals, you could
use e.g. (number? (syntax-e #'arg)) to identify a numeric literal. But it
is not very common that a macro handles a numeric literal differently
Hi Guys,
What are the rules for macro guards? I’ve only seen examples with (identifier?
#’val) being used. What about (number? #’val) or (spring? #’val)? When I try
these I get a foo: bad syntax so I’m suspecting these can’t be used or there’s
some trick to them.
What I’ve been trying to creat
On 5/29/2019 11:52 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
Does anyone use single-flonums in Racket?
I don't mean `_float` or `f32vector`s, which convert C `float`s or
32-bit array elements into regular double-precision Racket flonums. I
mean literals like `3.0f0` or functions like `real->single-flonum`,
whi
Does anyone use single-flonums in Racket?
I don't mean `_float` or `f32vector`s, which convert C `float`s or
32-bit array elements into regular double-precision Racket flonums. I
mean literals like `3.0f0` or functions like `real->single-flonum`,
which produce a Racket number that uses only 32 bit
Hi,
I would like to know how you would implement bitstrings "à la APL", meaning
bitstrings/bitvectors of arbitrary dimensions with packed representation and
possibilities for implicit parallelism.
I am under the impression that this essentially means adding a bit type to the
numeric tower, but
10 matches
Mail list logo
