The paragraph in 1.2.3.9 starts with "For a top-level definition (outside of a
module), the order of evaluation affects the binding of a generated definition
for a generated identifier use." So when you run this example in a top-level
environment, e.g., the interactions window (aka repl) it wo
In the section 1.2.3.9 : Macro-Introduced Bindings
the example below give the following error
"define-syntaxes: context (defining "odd.1", ...) expected 2 values,
received 0 values"
(define-syntax defs-and-uses
(syntax-rules ()
[(def-and-use)
(begin
; Declare before def
The main other interesting things going on are validating that all the
variants are from the same type, every variant is covered, all the
fields are there, etc.
Jay
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Jeremy Kun wrote:
> So it looks like there are a lot more complicated things going on in
> define-
So it looks like there are a lot more complicated things going on in
define-type and type-case than I naively tried to implement myself. It's
probably safer to just do the nice (require (only-in)) thing and not
reinvent a worse version of the wheel. Although I did get my particular
define-syntax to
Thank you; that's great. I'm most of the way
there now.
Still, I'm finding the text% documentation
tough sledding; the tools seem lower-level
than I need.
Is there a keybinding file somewhere for
emacs commands? I think changing the
actual keystrokes in that file would be the
easiest way for m
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Jeremy Kun wrote:
> Is there an existing Racket analogue for the "define-type" language form
> from the PLAI text?
You can pull out specific things from a language or module by using:
(require (only-in some-module
language-feature-1 l
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Jeremy Kun wrote:
> Is there an existing Racket analogue for the "define-type" language form
> from the PLAI text? Is there a quick way for me to just (require-syntax
> define-type) so I can use it in my otherwise purely-Racket programs? Or
> perhaps, is there a wa
Is there an existing Racket analogue for the "define-type" language form
from the PLAI text? Is there a quick way for me to just (require-syntax
define-type) so I can use it in my otherwise purely-Racket programs? Or
perhaps, is there a way for me to look at the original syntax definitions so
I can
Hi.
I’m trying to figure out if that’s anyway I could have racket to draw out the
cell model representation for cons or list operations. Or there are plugins
available for me because I don’t seem to find it.
I would like to visualize the model given a list or cons operations but it
seems to be
9 matches
Mail list logo
