Re: [racket-users] make-set!-transformer

Here it is. https://github.com/racket/racket/blob/master/pkgs/racket-doc/scribblings/reference/stx-trans.scrbl#L31 I agree that it will be good to have a pointer or an example involving set!-values in the documentation of make-set!-transformer. The status quo is kind of indirect. The

Re: [racket-users] for/set

On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 04:18:24PM -0700, Sorawee Porncharoenwase wrote: > There’s a search bar in the top left of every doc page. Somehow I hadn't noticed that. It's a huge help to know that. > Typing for/set and > enter will show you this search result page >

Re: [racket-users] for/set

It’s with the set data type - but I haven’t used it https://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/sets.html#%28form._%28%28lib._racket%2Fset..rkt%29._for%2Fset%29%29 On Sat, 9 May 2020 at 00:07, Hendrik Boom wrote: > Where is for/set documented? What does it do? > > It is mentioned in the typed

Re: [racket-users] for/set

There’s a search bar in the top left of every doc page. Typing for/set and enter will show you this search result page . Here, the first result

Re: [racket-users] add set-subset?

Yes, @index I learned about it to put "powerset" to the docs, and always go back to that example when something like this comes up: https://github.com/racket/racket/blob/master/pkgs/racket-doc/scribblings/reference/pairs.scrbl#L1333 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the

Re: [racket-users] add set-subset?

Do we have an existing doc redirect mechanism? I’ve just spent five minutes looking at docs for defproc and the “Indexing” section, and didn’t find anything. Doesn’t mean it’s not there, but I did have a look. Then again, this thread is a living testament to my inability to find things in

Re: [racket-users] add set-subset?

Could we add a macro to allow defining alias names? Could call it `set!-set-subset?`. And probably want a way to see all such aliases: `get-set!-set-subset?-set-subs`. p.s. In all seriousness, the doc redirect is a great idea. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the

Re: [racket-users] add set-subset?

How about a pull request that redirects searches for "set-subset?" to the `subset?` function? -- 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

Re: [racket-users] add set-subset?

I am so glad that I'm not the only one who does this. On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 2:16 PM 'John Clements' via Racket Users < racket-users@googlegroups.com> wrote: > D’oh! It’s just called subset? > > Sorry, > > John > > > > On Oct 4, 2018, at 11:16 AM, 'John Clements' via Racket Users < >

Re: [racket-users] add set-subset?

D’oh! It’s just called subset? Sorry, John > On Oct 4, 2018, at 11:16 AM, 'John Clements' via Racket Users > wrote: > > It seems strange to me that we have (AFAICT) set-union, set-subtract, and > set-member?, but not set-subset?. Would it make sense for me to propose a > pull request for

Re: [racket-users] list->set behavior on lists of symbols

Thank you David and Alexis for the helpful answers. Deyaa On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 2:17 AM, Alexis King wrote: > David’s explanation is good. Let me add a little bit more context. It is > a common mistake to think that ' can be used as a shorthand form of the > `list`

Re: [racket-users] list->set behavior on lists of symbols

David’s explanation is good. Let me add a little bit more context. It is a common mistake to think that ' can be used as a shorthand form of the `list` function, but this is not the case. The quote form is a primitive, and it has very specific (if fairly simple) behavior with respect to

Re: [racket-users] list->set behavior on lists of symbols

Hi Deyaa, > I wonder why (list->set '('1)) evaluates to (set ''1) instead of (set '1). > I use Racket v6.7. The expression '('1) is a shorter way of writing (quote ((quote 1))) The value of (quote x) is x, so the value of that is the list containing (quote 1), or ((quote 1)). In

Re: [racket-users] Re: set a timeout to tcp-connect

At Fri, 17 Jul 2015 16:58:50 +0200, mazert wrote: Le 17/07/2015 16:16, Matthias Felleisen a écrit : This actually works. But I am not sure why you'd want to do something like that. Ah yes, letrec is what I was looking for :) . The goal was to test a port with a specific timeout (here I

Re: [racket-users] generalised set! in Racket

Hi all, Thanks to all replies, at the moment I would tend to agree that generalised `set!` might not be such a great idea after all: - The notion of 'place' is essentially a pointer to a memory location, but it is not the first-class citizen: the following expressions are not

Re: [racket-users] generalised set! in Racket

On Jul 1, 2015, at 4:27 AM, Alexey Cherkaev alexey.cherk...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, Thanks to all replies, at the moment I would tend to agree that generalised `set!` might not be such a great idea after all: The notion of 'place' is essentially a pointer to a memory location, but it

Re: [racket-users] generalised set! in Racket

On Jun 30, 2015, at 6:43 PM, George Neuner wrote: On 6/30/2015 5:34 PM, 'John Clements' via Racket Users wrote: On Jun 30, 2015, at 8:10 AM, Alexey Cherkaev alexey.cherk...@gmail.com wrote: ... wouldn't it be beneficial to have such a generalised 'set!' system-wide? I understand

Re: [racket-users] generalised set! in Racket

On Jun 30, 2015, at 5:34 PM, 'John Clements' via Racket Users racket-users@googlegroups.com wrote: Specifically, one of the basic ideas of algebraic languages is that programs are compositional. Specifically, if I write (a (b x) c), then the meaning of this term depends on the meanings of

Re: [racket-users] generalised set! in Racket

Racket does have 'make-set!-transformer' that allows you to define syntax that cooperates with 'set!'. I think that might work if you are defining your own datatype. Have you seen that? Thanks, Dave On 06/30/2015 11:10 AM, Alexey Cherkaev wrote: Hi Alexander, Thanks for your reply: I had

Re: [racket-users] generalised set! in Racket

I have implemented generalized `set!` in Racket before, as a cute exploratory exercise, but I haven't found a sufficiently compelling benefit of generalized `set!`. The closest I've imagined to benefit of generalized `set!`: let's say you had really terse but nice referencing syntax for

Re: [racket-users] generalised set! in Racket

Hi Alexander, Thanks for your reply: I had something similar in mind (maybe I should check out math/array). I was just wondering if there was something more Racket-like (it still feels that SRFI is somewhat 'foreign' hack). And my last question remains: wouldn't it be beneficial to have such a

Re: [racket-users] generalised set! in Racket

As the mentioned SRFI states it: This is a proposal to allow procedure calls that evaluate to the value of a location to be used to /set/ the value of the location, when used as the first operand of |set!|. The term location is only used in the introductory part but for those who know the

Re: [racket-users] generalised set! in Racket

On Jun 30, 2015, at 8:10 AM, Alexey Cherkaev alexey.cherk...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Alexander, Thanks for your reply: I had something similar in mind (maybe I should check out math/array). I was just wondering if there was something more Racket-like (it still feels that SRFI is somewhat

Re: [racket-users] generalised set! in Racket

On 6/30/2015 5:34 PM, 'John Clements' via Racket Users wrote: On Jun 30, 2015, at 8:10 AM, Alexey Cherkaev alexey.cherk...@gmail.com wrote: ... wouldn't it be beneficial to have such a generalised 'set!' system-wide? I understand that Racket focusses more on immutable structures, but there

Re: [racket-users] generalised set! in Racket

On Jun 30, 2015, at 3:43 PM, George Neuner gneun...@comcast.net wrote: that's just semantics. XD -- 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

Re: [racket-users] generalised set! in Racket

On 06/30/2015 07:27 PM, 'John Clements' via Racket Users wrote: On Jun 30, 2015, at 3:43 PM, George Neuner gneun...@comcast.net wrote: that's just semantics. XD Let me expound a bit on John's pure-functional snooty-poo reply. Semantics - what programs mean - is everything. Exactly how

Re: [racket-users] generalised set! in Racket

On Jun 29, 2015, at 5:56 AM, Alexey Cherkaev alexey.cherk...@gmail.com wrote: For example, I was thinking of defining syntax to access my implementation of multidimensional arrays as (define-syntax aref (syntax-rules (set!) [(set! (aref ?a ?i ...) ?v) (array-set! ?a ?i ... ?v)]