On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> I asked him for the executive summary, soo to speak, and he told me that
> the problem ws that Racket was more demanding on a virtual machine
> (which is potentially shared) than on a real machine (where you actually
> have all the real memory
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 10:04:10PM -0400, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
> On Jul 19, 2011, at 9:28 PM, Hendrik Boom wrote:
>
> > My son tried to gat a web site working using the RAcket web engine. In
> > the end, he failed. He had rented virtual machine from a server
> > provider, and discover
On Jul 19, 2011, at 9:28 PM, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> My son tried to gat a web site working using the RAcket web engine. In
> the end, he failed. He had rented virtual machine from a server
> provider, and discovered that Racket just used too much active memory
> for that configuration to be
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Danny Wilson wrote:
> Short version: is there an implementation of
> http://www.dwheeler.com/readable/sweet-expressions.html for typed/racket or
> just racket?
No, there isn't, to my knowledge. However, Wheeler makes the good
decision, in this context, to make s
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 08:54:12PM -0400, Marc Feeley wrote:
>
> On 2011-07-19, at 5:29 PM, Hendrik Boom wrote:
>
> > The world has long needed a good, practical, flexible GC that can handle
> > parallelism. The days that each programming language had to have its
> > owm specialized and incomp
On Sun, Jul 17, 2011 at 07:13:07PM +0200, Danny Wilson wrote:
> Hi List,
>
> Short version: is there an implementation of
> http://www.dwheeler.com/readable/sweet-expressions.html for
> typed/racket or just racket?
>
>
> Long version:
>
> The past few days I've gotten really excited about the
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 8:24 PM, Justin Zamora wrote:
> Is there a built in way to exit the various kinds of for loops early?
> I've been using code like:
>
> (let/ec break
> (for ([i (in-range 1 100)]
> #:when (condition? i))
> (break i
>
> Is there a better way?
>
> Justin
I
Is there a built in way to exit the various kinds of for loops early?
I've been using code like:
(let/ec break
(for ([i (in-range 1 100)]
#:when (condition? i))
(break i
Is there a better way?
Justin
_
For list-related admi
Allocation doesn't work very well in parallel. It is one of the few
operations that doesn't work well in parallel and yet will still
support a little because it is so hard to eliminate completely. But
when the two futures are doing essentially only allocation, then you
will see no parallel speedup.
Hi List,
Short version: is there an implementation of
http://www.dwheeler.com/readable/sweet-expressions.html for
typed/racket or just racket?
Long version:
The past few days I've gotten really excited about the possibilities of
using the Racket for my projects. I'm mostly a self-taught p
I am trying to create a matrix like structure in parallel. It was my intention
to create each row of the matrix in parallel, and then simply combine them
together using a list or some other collection. My questions is this, the
following code will create the structure that I am looking for, bu
Thanks for the update. -- Matthias
On Jul 19, 2011, at 4:03 PM, John Riedl wrote:
> Matthias:
>
> Thank you for your explanation. I've gotten speak-word and speak-list
> working now. There were several challenges:
>
> 1. HtDP talks about sound.ss. There is a sound.ss distributed with
> ra
Matthias:
Thank you for your explanation. I've gotten speak-word and speak-list
working now. There were several challenges:
1. HtDP talks about sound.ss. There is a sound.ss distributed with
racket 5.1.1, but it's the deinprogramm version, which supports
completely different commands. If you
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Ismael Figueroa Palet
wrote:
> Thanks Matthias and Sam, the macro expansion now works as I intended, with
> the following change:
>
> (define-syntax-rule (with-monad ( ) )
> (let ((u )
> (b ))
> (syntax-parameterize ([bind (make-rename-transform
Thanks Matthias and Sam, the macro expansion now works as I intended, with
the following change:
(define-syntax-rule (with-monad ( ) )
(let ((u )
(b ))
(syntax-parameterize ([bind (make-rename-transformer #'b)])
(syntax-parameterize ([unit
(make-renam
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 2:06 PM, Ismael Figueroa Palet
wrote:
> Hi all, I'm trying to implement some simple macros to use monads in racket
> using a Haskell-like do notation. I have the following macros, and my
> problem is that I want the do macro to capture the bind identifier created
> by with-
Hi all, I'm trying to implement some simple macros to use monads in racket
using a Haskell-like do notation. I have the following macros, and my
problem is that I want the do macro to capture the bind identifier created
by with-monad, and in each recursive step of the do macro expansion keep the
sa
On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 16:53, Rodolfo Carvalho wrote:
> 2011/7/16 Matthias Felleisen
>
>>
>> On Jul 16, 2011, at 10:04 AM, José Lopes wrote:
>>
>> > The second feature is the ability to expand/collapse function
>> definitions, i.e., hide
>> > the body of a function and just see the name and para
2011/7/16 Matthias Felleisen
>
> On Jul 16, 2011, at 10:04 AM, José Lopes wrote:
>
> > The second feature is the ability to expand/collapse function
> definitions, i.e., hide
> > the body of a function and just see the name and parameters.
>
> You can collapse S-expressions into dots in DrRacket.
If you don't mind relying on an external program you can install
espeak ( http://espeak.sourceforge.net/) and then simply do:
(define (speak text) (system* (find-executable-path "espeak") text))
(speak "Hello world")
Stephan
On 07/19/2011 04:28 AM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
Well, yes, if you
20 matches
Mail list logo
