Re: [racket-users] Some Scribble links not redirecting to docs.racket-lang.org

2018-08-01 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 8:15:58 AM UTC-5, Matthew Flatt wrote: > > Are the other packages installed in installation scope or user scope? > That was indeed the problem. I was able to find out the installed packages’ scope through the Package Manager in DrRacket. Removing the packages,

[racket-users] Modify Scribble HTML for integration with site

2018-08-13 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
I would like to include some scribble/manual docs as part of a larger web site, and would like to provide some extra navigation links for the reader so they can see “how to get back out again”. Is there a facility within Scribble for augmenting the HTML just after the beginning of the tag? I

[racket-users] HN: "The Siren Song of Little Languages"

2019-03-26 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
This is a blog post / discussion that seems like it could use a little clarity and evangelism from the Racket world: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19481789 I’m struggling to understand exactly what problem the blogger sees with "little" languages. -- You received this message

[racket-users] Re: Scribble wraps @verbatim? Also, comments on Scribble

2019-02-27 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
On Wednesday, February 27, 2019 at 11:03:46 AM UTC-6, David K. Storrs wrote: > Also, it would be really spiffy if the generated HTML was > pretty-printed. Having it minified seems unnecessary and > disadvantageous. > > On occasions where I’ve wanted to go spelunking in Scribble-generated

[racket-users] Re: Licence guidance

2019-03-12 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
Most of my projects are like Stephen's (a) scenario. I typically want a non-copyleft/permissive license for these. In such cases I have usually followed the FSF's advice and used Apache 2.0. However... Recently I read the following blog post by Kyle Mitchell, a practicing IP lawyer:

[racket-users] Re: Beginning of the end for googlegroups?

2019-01-29 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
A possible alternative to Google would be to host this group as a forum on a public Fossil repository. Fossil is a source control system similar to Git. But unlike Git, a fossil repo can include its own forum (as well as wiki and issue tracking), and it has a built-in web interface. A Fossil

[racket-users] Re: Distributing executables with homebrew

2019-06-09 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
I’m no expert, but since no one else has chimed in: if you’re distributing a program (vs a library) and you want it to work regardless of whether Racket is installed, what you probably want is to compile your program using raco distribute (https://docs.racket-lang.org/raco/exe-dist.html). Then

Re: [racket-users] Re: Racket v7.4

2019-08-14 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 11:54:03 AM UTC-5, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: > > Just to confirm this, what does > https://www.whatismybrowser.com/detect/what-is-my-user-agent report > for both of your browsers? > > On Win10 / FF that website says: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64;

Re: [racket-users] Re: Racket v7.4

2019-08-14 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 12:18:30 PM UTC-5, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: > > Thanks, that's helpful. Looking at the source, it seems that > `navigator.appVersion` is what's being looked at. What does > `navigator.userAgent` return for your two browsers? > Win10 / Firefox: >

Re: [racket-users] Re: Racket v7.4

2019-08-14 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 7:24:25 AM UTC-5, johnbclements wrote: > > What distribution and platform do you have selected? The “variant” menu > will only appear for certain choices of distribution and platform. > > That was it…In Win/FF the platform selector defaults to the Windows x86_32

Re: [racket-users] Is it possible to sell commercial use rights to an open source Racket package?

2019-08-27 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
On Friday, August 23, 2019 at 10:40:13 AM UTC-5, Alexis King wrote: > > Distributing a closed-source, non-LGPL Racket application without > violating Racket’s licensing terms is likely to be very difficult or > impossible, pending the still-ongoing MIT + Apache 2 relicensing effort. > > This

Re: [racket-users] Is it possible to sell commercial use rights to an open source Racket package?

2019-08-28 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 12:10:56 AM UTC-5, Alex Harsanyi wrote: > > I am curious to know how you plan to comply with section 4.d of the LGPL, > which states that the users of your application must be able to replace the > LGPL "library" with a modified version of their own -- this means

Re: [racket-users] Is it possible to sell commercial use rights to an open source Racket package?

2019-08-28 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 11:54:42 AM UTC-5, Neil Van Dyke wrote: > > If someone violates (their non-lawyer interpretation of) the Racket > license, in a conspicuous manner like you suggest, would they not expect > the SFC to send them a nastygram -- perhaps if only for the SFC to show >

Re: [racket-users] Is it possible to sell commercial use rights to an open source Racket package?

2019-08-29 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 9:01:51 AM UTC-5, Matthew Flatt wrote: > > Lingering elsewhere: the relicensing project that commenced more than > > 2.5 years ago [5] — not clear whether under the SFC this effort is > > alive, dead, or what. Of course, Galaxy's Edge took 3 yrs to build, > >

Re: [racket-users] Is it possible to sell commercial use rights to an open source Racket package?

2019-08-29 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 10:45:33 AM UTC-5, Matthew Flatt wrote: > > > A pulse and keyboard is a good start, but the task requires significant > initiative to work with the Conservancy to get guidance and make sure > things move along. The process may possibly involve contacting >

Re: [racket-users] Is it possible to sell commercial use rights to an open source Racket package?

2019-08-29 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
On Thursday, August 29, 2019 at 11:27:41 AM UTC-5, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: > > Thanks for volunteering! I'll follow-up off-list. > > Sam > Sure thing. Just minutes ago I dug up the Relicensing Permission issue on GitHub and found you have made significant progress. Not looking to wrest this

Re: [racket-users] Would it help to call racket2 something else?

2019-08-28 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
On Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 4:14:40 PM UTC-5, David Storrs wrote: > On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 5:08 PM Daniel Prager wrote: > >> I reckon *#lang retack* would at least make an apt working title. ;-) >> > > Hang on, 'tack' means to change direction across the wind, so shouldn't > 'retack' mean

[racket-users] Re: Calling function with Scribble text as argument(s)

2019-07-30 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
On Tuesday, July 30, 2019 at 12:02:02 PM UTC-5, Hendrik Boom wrote: > > For example, to make a function has the colour red built in, > I tried > > @(define (redtext text) (colorize #:color "red" text)) > > which did not work. > When you say "which did not work" — what didn't work exactly?

[racket-users] Re: evaluating Scribble for prose

2019-08-02 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
On Thursday, August 1, 2019 at 10:14:09 AM UTC-5, David Storrs wrote: > > > A) Could conditionally include sections depending on environment variables > or command-line switches > B) Could seamlessly generate PDF, MOBI, EPUB, and clean and valid HTML > that either inlines the CSS or links to a

[racket-users] Re: pict superimpose documentation

2019-08-06 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
The example code using the blue circle and the red rectangle makes it pretty clear. Each pict gets covered up by the one to its right in the argument list. On Saturday, August 3, 2019 at 6:14:13 PM UTC-5, Hendrik Boom wrote: > > The documentation in >

[racket-users] Re: Racket v7.4

2019-08-09 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
On Win10 / Firefox the "variant" selector does not appear for me, I'm not sure why yet. I don't have any errors in the console. I can see it just fine on Win10 / Chrome, macOS / Safari, and macOS / Firefox. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket

[racket-users] Re: typo in manual

2019-11-22 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
Documentation for individual packages is maintained by the package authors. Clicking on the "package" link at the top brings you to https://pkgs.racket-lang.org/package/colors which says the Git repo is at https://github.com/florence/colors/tree/master/scribblings I can submit a pull request

Re: [racket-users] Limiting consecutive identical elements with match

2019-12-04 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
ase wrote: > > This is super cool indeed. Now I feel stupid. > > On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 2:56 PM Matthew Butterick > wrote: > >> >> On Dec 4, 2019, at 2:39 PM, 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users < >> racket...@googlegroups.com > wrote: >> >

[racket-users] Limiting consecutive identical elements with match

2019-12-04 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
(This is related to the problem for this year’s Advent of Code day 4, so...SPOILERS.) (I did solve both parts of today's problem, so this is more for my own edification.) The problem involves finding lists of numbers, one of the criteria for which is that the list has at least two consecutive

[racket-users] Re: reading code

2019-10-24 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
On Thursday, October 24, 2019 at 10:46:15 AM UTC-5, Hendrik Boom wrote: > > If DrRacket already does this, I haven't found it. It does lovely > graphics do show bindings, but I don't see how to follow those lines > even to parts of the same file that happen to be out of the window > area, let

Re: [racket-users] Strange performance behavior

2020-08-07 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
On Wednesday, August 5, 2020 at 10:44:21 AM UTC-5 Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: > Here's a benchmark of your two functions that takes long enough to run > that it avoids some of these issues, and also runs a GC before > benchmarking: https://gist.github.com/7cb4645308d8572e2250833ef7b90b7c >

[racket-users] Re: Racket v7.8

2020-08-04 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
I'm very interested in the prop:struct-field-info property. Is there any documentation on it? I notice docs.racket-lang.org still says 7.7 up at the top. Thanks to everyone for this release! On Monday, August 3, 2020 at 12:19:57 PM UTC-5 johnbclements wrote: > This release announcement

Re: [racket-users] Creating links to Racket docs for functions in user-scope packages

2020-07-13 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
On Monday, July 13, 2020 at 8:37:52 AM UTC-5, Matthew Flatt wrote: > > It might end up being about the same implementation effort to improve the > error message or to make the function work on user-scope packages > That was my sense as well...I will try taking a look at this, maybe I can

[racket-users] Creating links to Racket docs for functions in user-scope packages

2020-07-12 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
Trying to generate URLs for linking into the Racket docs. I get the error below, but only when the package/identifier combo in question are installed in user scope, and only when using the `#:external-root-url` keyword argument: > (define x (xref-binding->definition-tag

Re: [racket-users] Creating links to Racket docs for functions in user-scope packages

2020-07-29 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
On Friday, July 24, 2020 at 11:15:54 AM UTC-5 Matthew Flatt wrote: > A solution might use something like `path->pkg+subpath+collect+scope`, > where a 'user result for the scope triggers a different path > calculation. For my application, I was able to use this info to make a function that

Re: [racket-users] Creating links to Racket docs for functions in user-scope packages

2020-07-21 Thread 'Joel Dueck' via Racket Users
It looks like the problem might be in this function where it always constructs a path that is relative to (find-doc-dir). Would it make sense instead to have it check the dest against all the paths