Hi Jon, > On May 31, 2017, at 6:14 PM, Jon Zeppieri <zeppi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 5:54 PM, Steve Byan's Lists > <steve-l...@byan-roper.org> wrote: >> So, I don't want to try to fit all the records in memory at once. I thought >> that the lazy stream would accomplish this --- am I wrong? > > You're right, but using a lazy stream will still consume more than > just using `read` within the loop that actually processes the data. > So, for example: > > (define (map-trace stat%-set in-port) > (for/fold ([sexp-count 0]) > ([trace-record (in-port read in)]) > (+ sexp-count 1))) > > (I didn't try this, but I think it's right.) > > This way, you don't build up a list or a lazy stream; you just process > each datum as it's read.
Thanks, I don't recall why I didn't think of this alternative. I guess I was hung up on streams, or else not thinking of s-expressions as lists :-( Best regards, -Steve -- Steve Byan steveb...@me.com Littleton, MA -- 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 options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
