Thanks Stuart. Is that a bug that will be fixed in 1.3? I was under the
impression that we can rely on print-dup for serialization. Am I wrong
about that?
Carson
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group,
error. I just search and replaced
clojure.lang.APersistentVector$SubVector/create with vec in the file and
then it was okay, I guess.
What's going on?
Thanks,
Carson
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this
Where you have "(reverse)", you are calling a no-argument function named
reverse, no? I don't see such a function defn'ed.
Where you have ":prefix rba-". Should there be quotes around *rba-*? Or
does that not matter?
Sorry can't be of more help.
Carson
-
I've given launch4j <http://launch4j.sourceforge.net/> a try and it seems to
work well for building Windows exe. I use lein to build an uberjar and then
use launch4j to make the exe.
Please let me know if you find something better though. :)
Best,
Carson
--
You received t
Curious if anyone has given Lush a try here? http://lush.sourceforge.net/
It's essentially a lisp-like way to write C, with lots of integration
with libraries to do numerical computing, machine learning, etc.
Carson
On Nov 24, 5:47 pm, CuppoJava wrote:
> I must admit that even thoug
other kinds of neural nets worthy of research besides
Eliasmith's NEF. Still, it'd be cool to have a Clojure frontend to
Nengo.
Carson
On Nov 13, 4:09 pm, Ross Gayler wrote:
> You might also consider using your DSL as a frontend to the Nengo
> neural simulator (http://nengo.c
Hi! That looks interesting. I'm curious how big a network are you
intending to experiment with? (ie, # of layers, size of layers?).
Carson
On Nov 11, 8:17 am, "Eric Schulte" wrote:
> Hi Saul,
>
> Saul Hazledine writes:
> > On Nov 10, 11:20 pm, "Eric Schult
e. And if performance guarantees are part of the
semantics of a function, then it's better for it to be documented in
the docstring to let people know without having to do complexity
analysis on the source.
Carson
On Nov 10, 10:40 am, Michael Gardner wrote:
> On Nov 10, 2010, at 11:36 AM
> rseq O(1), reverse O(n).
> peek O(1), last O(n).
> pop O(1), butlast O(n).
> get O(1), nth O(n).
I don't see that in the documentation... If these functions aren't
"collapsed", then it's better if at least (doc reverse) says something
about O(n) and &q
I should add, "oops, ignore what I wrote". :)
see:
https://groups.google.com/group/clojure/tree/browse_frm/thread/33366bccc6df7756/415072576d83b757?rnum=11&_done=%2Fgroup%2Fclojure%2Fbrowse_frm%2Fthread%2F33366bccc6df7756%3F#doc_0d0a3759a0a10328
Carson
On Jul 17, 3:58 pm, Carso
Hi Per,
woh, take it easy. I don't claim to be an expert. Thanks for showing
me that though. It certainly didn't seem right at first, but I had
trouble figuring out the laziness in clojure, me being new to it.
Anyway, have a good weekend!
Carson
On Jul 17, 10:02 pm, Per Vognsen wr
Thanks David.
On Jul 17, 4:58 pm, David Nolen wrote:
> I tried this, it runs in about the same amount of time as it did for you.
>
> On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 7:17 PM, Carson wrote:
> > Hi David,
> > Would appreciate if you could try out my attempt at this [1] on your
>
imes [_ 10] (convolve dxs dys
"Elapsed time: 0.506432 msecs"
Have a good weekend,
Carson
On Jul 17, 6:13 pm, Frederick Polgardy wrote:
> I think it really doesn't get any clearer than this in terms of intent. While
> I was adept at calculus-level math 20 years ago, I'
now if it can be called idiomatic, but it looks functional to
me, doesn't use any type hints or mutable arrays, and it seems pretty
fast. Convolves two 100 size vectors in roughly ~600 ms I
think...
Carson
On Jul 17, 5:44 pm, Frederick Polgardy wrote:
> This example is beside
%2Fthread%2Fee4169bc292ab572%2Ff769ca6eb6fb8622%3Ftvc%3D1%26#doc_6d03461efde166ad
Thanks,
Carson
On Jul 17, 4:04 pm, David Nolen wrote:
> (defn ^{:static true} convolve ^doubles [^doubles xs ^doubles is]
> (let [xlen (count xs)
> ilen (count is)
> ys (double-ar
ems to run pretty fast and seems to be the kind of convolution you
want.
Thanks for the interesting problem!
Carson
On Jul 16, 12:57 pm, Isaac Hodes wrote:
> I posted this on StackOverflow yesterday, but to no avail: I don't
> think many people looked at it, or least I didn't g
Congrats!
On Jul 13, 11:56 pm, bOR_ wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> My first paper with results based on a clojure-build agent-based model
> is in press! If you have academic access to the journal, you can peek
> at it here:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.epidem.2010.05.003, but
> otherwise it is also available
ourse. Whether you think it matters day-
to-day is something else. On that note, my own code works fine on the
new equal branch.
It does concern me a little bit that to really understand what a
function or loop/recur will do, it seems I'd have to know the kind of
primitive type that the varia
On Jun 18, 6:11 am, Rich Hickey wrote:
> On Jun 18, 2010, at 6:47 AM, Carson wrote:
> > Just tried out num branch and I really like how easy it is to be
> > fast! However...
>
> > Consider:
>
> > (defn fact [n] (if (zero? n) 1 (* n (fact (dec n)
>
On Jun 18, 5:45 am, David Nolen wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 6:47 AM, Carson wrote:
> > (defn fact [n] (if (zero? n) 1 (* n (fact (dec n)
> > (defn twice-fact [n] (fact (fact n)))
> > (defn bad-twice-fact [n] (fact (-> n fact range last inc)))
>
> Not o
On Jun 18, 4:22 am, Nicolas Oury wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 11:47 AM, Carson wrote:
> > Don't buy it. That's the whole point of BigInt contagion. If fact and foo
> > > are correctly written this will work.
>
> > BigInt contagion doesn't he
On Jun 18, 2:44 am, Christophe Grand wrote:
> With contagious bigints (let's nick name them "safeints" and assume
> they are not BigInteger but something à la kawa) a single N on
> literals or having all your inputs going through a safeint conversion
> would trigger safe computations (unless you t
oo) x) can ensure all arguments and
return values of function foo are boxed, and recursively, ensures
boxing of arguments and return values for all functions called by foo,
etc. Is that possible? Would that guarantee safety?
Carson
On Jun 17, 11:35 pm, David Nolen wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010
4:22 pm, James Reeves wrote:
>
> > On 15 June 2010 23:26, Carson wrote:
>
> > > Sorry I may have missed the reason for this earlier: What's the
> > > reason for allowing both 'i' and 'j' to indicate the imaginary part?
> > > Is
Sorry I may have missed the reason for this earlier: What's the
reason for allowing both 'i' and 'j' to indicate the imaginary part?
Is the intention to also later have 'k' to support quaternions? Just
curious. Thanks.
Carson
On Jun 14, 10:12 am, Travis Hoff
f it
so Emacs can connect to it (or does it already?).
Thanks!
Carson
On Mar 23, 11:53 am, Lee Spector wrote:
> I like where this is going but I would suggest that there's a significant
> audience (including me and most of my students) in what we might call
> category A.01: Wa
ork, just to find
instructions that worked; otherwise I would've went on to Sage/SciPy/
Python.
Carson
On Mar 22, 6:31 pm, Lee Spector wrote:
> I agree with Sean on the near-orthogonality of sysadmin skills and the skills
> needed to get a lot of Clojure as a language. I have precious few
27 matches
Mail list logo
