That doesn't sound familiar to me, but you might try sending it a
break and seeing if you get a stack trace that would give more of a
clue.
Specifically, start up drracket from a command-line like this:
racket -W info -l- drracket
and then when it is doing this bad thing, hit control-c. The ou
I've installed DrRacket in an Ubuntu lab at school (with, admittedly,
some fairly old systems), and while it is briefly responsive when I
first fire it up, it then spikes to 100% CPU and is totally useless for
a bit; if I take focus away it eventually registers the keystrokes I
made, but the moment
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 8:57 PM, keyd...@gmx.de wrote:
> , I start to think I was not too far off perhaps? Because ORMs, and
> relational-algebra-to-SQL compilers (one thing I find fascinating personally,
> but ...) would be fine examples of software that'd run into the kind of
> problems I wa
Hi Matthias & Ryan & all,
>
>
> Sigrid, this sounds like a context-dependency. That is, you use the same
> language (in the sense of API) but depending on the DB to which you bind the
> meaning is subtly different with implications for correctness and
> performance.
>
> I am wondering whet
I just want to thank Ray for raising this issue and the list for all the
clarifying answers.
I've been working on Racket side projects for the past 9 mos or so and was
totally confused by this issue of how to properly modularize my library
code. It should be something that is drop dead clear and i
On Aug 22, 2011, at 11:11 AM, Carl Eastlund wrote:
>>
>> (module uses-bad racket
>> (require 'names)
>> (f)
>> (let ()
>>(local-require 'names)
>>(f)))
>>
>> (require 'uses-bad)
>>
>> Perhaps I just misunderstand.
>
> Why are you using both require and local-require?
My mistake.
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 11:05 AM, Matthias Felleisen
wrote:
> 4. Since we don't quite understand your actual goal, Carl lists a number of
> alternatives. One is to locally require a module into a scope definition
> context:
>
> #lang racket/load
>
> (module names racket/base
> (provide f)
> (d
Maxim, let me re-order Carl's message.
1. You are trying to implement a non-hygienic macro. That is, your my-begin
macro is supposed to bind names in its expressions that are not in the scope of
the expressions.
2. Racket's macro system is hygienic, that is, the default does not allow such
Maxim,
There are a few tools that might accomplish what you want. To have
scoped definitions available to a set of top-level definitions (i.e.
those inside my-begin), use splicing-local from racket/splicing. To
make a set of definitions available at one place, you could package
them up as a unit
Hello.
Thank you for your reply, Eli.
It looks like I need to state my question more clearly.
The trick I'm looking for is how to create a quasi-begin form inside
which you can use all the other symbols defined in the module, while
those symbols are not imported into top-level. In fact the onl
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 7:32 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 9:40 PM, Norman Gray wrote:
>> date->seconds has a sort of core-ish feel."
>
> That's correct. There are two problems here: first, `date->seconds'
> is missing a type, along with most of the rest of the `racke
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Norman Gray wrote:
> (Is the list generally OK for straight bug reports? There isn't a bug parade
> I should be posting this on, is there?)
For things that are definitely bugs like this, you can report them
using "Submit Bug Report" in the Help menu in DrRacket
Yesterday, Ray Racine wrote:
> >
> > If you're working on a shell it would be better to use readline --
> > but since you're using the git head, it's even better to use the
> > new `xrepl'. Just add (require xrepl) to your ~/.racketrc, and
> > you'll get readline and an additional bunch of tools f
50 minutes ago, Maxim Romashchenko wrote:
>
> --- my-module.rkt ---
> #lang racket
> (provide my-begin)
>
> (define foo
>...
> -
You could do this:
#lang racket
(provide (rename-out [begin my-begin]))
and get what you want,
> --- main.rkt ---
> #lang racket
> (requ
Hello.
Is there a way in Racket to have a module (say, "my-module") which
provides just one form (say, "my-begin"), and this form works the same
way as standard begin, but inside it all the bindings from the
my-module become visible.
So the module may look like this:
--- my-module.rkt ---
#
On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 9:40 PM, Norman Gray wrote:
> date->seconds has a sort of core-ish feel."
That's correct. There are two problems here: first, `date->seconds'
is missing a type, along with most of the rest of the `racket/date'
library. Second, there's a bug in Typed Racket that causes t
#lang racket ; windows 7
(current-library-collection-paths)
(#
#)
I use the first path as a root for my own reuasable collections. You have to
avoid having both roots containing the same collection names, of course. I
use relative paths for code that is not likely to be reused in other
programs.
17 matches
Mail list logo
