Re: [racket-users] What's the correct way to test a Racket build?

The most basic test suite is run with `racket/bin/racket pkgs/racket-test-core/tests/racket/test.rkt`. There are a lot of other tests; a good guide is the CI suite here: https://github.com/racket/racket/blob/master/.github/workflows/ci-push.yml#L283-L318 In general, and certainly for a release bu

[racket-users] What's the correct way to test a Racket build?

Hi, After an in-place build of Racket from source (from a git clone), what's the correct way to test that Racket functions correctly? I can't find documentation on this. Is it simply running "racket/bin/raco test pkgs/racket-test" from the root of the repository? Also, for a release (say, tag

Re: [racket-users] What's the point of make-continuation-mark-key?

We created the continuation-mark-key data type in ~2011 to support Typed Racket. At that point, Racket had continuation mark support for more than a decade using other values as keys. Sam On Sat, Jan 11, 2020, 11:37 PM Jack Firth wrote: > That makes sense. I think the thing that seems most conf

Re: [racket-users] What's the point of make-continuation-mark-key?

That makes sense. I think the thing that seems most confusing to me is that using the continuation-mark-key data type is *optional*. Why bother allowing arbitrary kinds of keys? On Saturday, January 11, 2020 at 8:02:44 PM UTC-8, Matthew Flatt wrote: > > It would be reasonable to generalize `chap

Re: [racket-users] What's the point of make-continuation-mark-key?

It would be reasonable to generalize `chaperone-continuation-mark-key` to apply in cases where `chaperone-struct` could work, with similar sorts of evidence that chaperoning is allowed provided by a caller of `chaperone-continuation-mark-key`. I guess we just didn't think about it that way when `ch

[racket-users] What's the point of make-continuation-mark-key?

Based on my reading of Continuation Frames and Marks , any value at all can be used as a key for a continuation mark. So why does make-continuation-mark-key

Re: [racket-users] What's the best way to do these syntax transforms?

On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 5:06 PM Christopher Lemmer Webber < cweb...@dustycloud.org> wrote: > Huh... somehow I had thought that I had heard that Racket has mutable > strings by default. It cropped up on my TODO list because of that. I > wonder what gave me that impression? > Racket strings are an

Re: [racket-users] What's the best way to do these syntax transforms?

On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 2:58 PM Matthew Flatt wrote: > More precisely, the reader (via `read-syntax`) creates immutable > strings. > > If a macro constructs a mutable string and converts it to a syntax > object, the string is not converted to an immutable string. Maybe it > should be. > I see now

Re: [racket-users] What's the best way to do these syntax transforms?

Jay McCarthy writes: > On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:51 AM Christopher Lemmer Webber < > cweb...@dustycloud.org> wrote: > >> I have a need to do two things in a #lang: >> >> - Most importantly, make all strings that appear in the source code >>immutable >> > > Make #%datum turn literal strings `s`

Re: [racket-users] What's the best way to do these syntax transforms?

Philip McGrath writes: > On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:56 AM Jay McCarthy wrote: > >> On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:51 AM Christopher Lemmer Webber < >> cweb...@dustycloud.org> wrote: >> >>> I have a need to do two things in a #lang: >>> >>> - Most importantly, make all strings that appear in the source c

Re: [racket-users] What's the best way to do these syntax transforms?

At Fri, 8 Nov 2019 11:28:46 -0500, Philip McGrath wrote: > On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:56 AM Jay McCarthy wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:51 AM Christopher Lemmer Webber < > > cweb...@dustycloud.org> wrote: > > > >> I have a need to do two things in a #lang: > >> > >> - Most importantly, make

Re: [racket-users] What's the best way to do these syntax transforms?

On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:56 AM Jay McCarthy wrote: > On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:51 AM Christopher Lemmer Webber < > cweb...@dustycloud.org> wrote: > >> I have a need to do two things in a #lang: >> >> - Most importantly, make all strings that appear in the source code >>immutable >> > > Make #

Re: [racket-users] What's the best way to do these syntax transforms?

On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:51 AM Christopher Lemmer Webber < cweb...@dustycloud.org> wrote: > I have a need to do two things in a #lang: > > - Most importantly, make all strings that appear in the source code >immutable > Make #%datum turn literal strings `s` into `(string->immutable-string s)

[racket-users] What's the best way to do these syntax transforms?

I have a need to do two things in a #lang: - Most importantly, make all strings that appear in the source code immutable - Second and not as urgent, I'd like to add a "dot" notation, so that (foo.bar 1 2 3) expands into (foo 'bar 1 2 3) It seems to me that both of these needs are similar.

Re: [racket-users] What's "#"?

Found the issue. I am populating a [VkPhysicalDeviceProperties](https://www.khronos.org/registry/vulkan/specs/1.1-extensions/man/html/VkPhysicalDeviceProperties.html) struct. On my system, C reports this structure as 824 bytes. (ctype-sizeof), on the other hand, says it's 312. Hardcoding 824 re

Re: [racket-users] What's "#"?

Alright, thanks. I have a couple of leads on what happened, but since the implementation details are private I'm unsure of the best troubleshooting technique in this context. For now I am making a minimal C project that builds a shared library and follows the same allocation pattern and FFI use

[racket-users] What's "#"?

Here's a Vulkan app that prints the properties of the first physical device on the system: https://github.com/zyrolasting/racket-vulkan/blob/master/examples/mandelbrot.rkt#L39 If you comment out the call to `vkGetPhysicalDeviceProperties`, the main module works. I create a Vulkan instance, prin

Re: [racket-users] What's wrong with my code?

🤩 Wow! I get it, thanks. 在 2019年7月9日星期二 UTC+8下午10:04:59，Alex Knauth写道： > > > On Jul 7, 2019, at 10:24 AM, 曹朝 > wrote: > > This is a simple algorithm for compute the shortest edit distance, it can > work with `#lang racket/base`. > But in Typed Racket, I just got the error message: "insufficient t

Re: [racket-users] What's wrong with my code?

> On Jul 7, 2019, at 10:24 AM, 曹朝 wrote: > > This is a simple algorithm for compute the shortest edit distance, it can > work with `#lang racket/base`. > But in Typed Racket, I just got the error message: "insufficient type > information to typecheck". I don't know why this code can't pass the

Re: [racket-users] What's wrong with my code?

Alright, thank you very much. 在 2019年7月8日星期一 UTC+8上午3:50:18，Matthias Felleisen写道： > > > With some for/loops in TR you’re out of luck. The expansion are too > complex to type-check easily. > > > On Jul 7, 2019, at 10:24 AM, 曹朝 > wrote: > > This is a simple algorithm for compute the shortest edit

Re: [racket-users] What's wrong with my code?

With some for/loops in TR you’re out of luck. The expansion are too complex to type-check easily. > On Jul 7, 2019, at 10:24 AM, 曹朝 wrote: > > This is a simple algorithm for compute the shortest edit distance, it can > work with `#lang racket/base`. > But in Typed Racket, I just got the err

Re: [racket-users] What's the next book, after HtDP SICP and EoPL?

It sounds like you're drawn in the direction of type theory. Lucky for you, there's a new "Little" book out that sounds perfect for you, "The Little Typer" by Friedman and Christiansen. It won't help with the jargon at all, but it covers the subject really well, and after reading it you should b

Re: [racket-users] What's the next book, after HtDP SICP and EoPL?

I found this to be especially good. Have a bang at this. On Sat, Dec 1, 2018 at 5:37 PM Chansey wrote: > Concepts, Techniques, and Models of Computer Programming -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group an

[racket-users] What's the next book, after HtDP SICP and EoPL?

Dear all, This question has little to do with Racket, please forgive me if it's not suitable for posting here. After reading Paul Graham's book "Hackers & Painters", I became fascinated with Lisp, so I chose Racket for learning Lisp. Now, I have finished reading the trilogy of the scheme: HtDP,