Hello,
How could I make for/fold indent like in the documentation?
I want this:
(for/fold ([sum 0]
[rev-roots null])
([i '(1 2 3 4)])
(values (+ sum i) (cons (sqrt i) rev-roots)))
But DrRacket insists on this:
(for/fold ([sum 0]
[rev-roots null])
([i '(
As far as I know, begin is the only form being spliced. Not only at top
level, but also within bodies of procedures and let-like forms. Racket
specialists may tell you more about it. You may want to visit the following
page:
http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/begin.html?q=begin#(form._((quote._~
To whom it concerns,
Rodolfo Carvelho has scrutinately read lc-with-redex, spotted some typos and
gave me some other advices which I followed. He my lc-with-redex.doc to
lc-with-redex.pdf. Thank you Rodolfo.
Depending on wich reader you use, you may see an ugly triangle in section
'Normal forms
Thank you so much. That clarifies it.
Is there a list of forms that splice into their context?
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 9:27 PM, Jos Koot wrote:
> **
> In addition to my previous mail:put the code in the definitions window of
> DrRacket and use the macro stepper to see how the code is expanded.
>
In addition to my previous mail:put the code in the definitions window of
DrRacket and use the macro stepper to see how the code is expanded.
Jos
_
From: users-boun...@racket-lang.org [mailto:users-boun...@racket-lang.org]
On Behalf Of nicolas.o...@gmail.com
Sent: viernes, 14 de octubre d
(begin (let/cc out (set! k out)) 5) is (in this case) the same as:
(let/cc out (set! k out))
5
In many cases the forms within a begin-form are spliced into their contexts
(in your case spliced into the top level)
The forms of (let ( ) form ...) are not spliced into their context.
Splicing subforms
Dear all,
I don't understand this behaviour:
> (define k #f)
> (begin (let/cc out (set! k out)) 5)
5
> (k #f)
#f
> (let () (let/cc out (set! k out)) 5)
5
> (k #f)
5
Does begin something special regarding continuation?
Best regards,
Nicolas.
_
It's not consistency. It's pragmatic consistency that I am after.
On Oct 14, 2011, at 2:21 PM, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:
> I admire the consistency of this position - I really do - but we also have
> check-error.
>
> --
> Pardon terseness and mistakes -- sent from phone.
>
I admire the consistency of this position - I really do - but we also have
check-error.
--
Pardon terseness and mistakes -- sent from phone.
_
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
Erwin,
Just in case you didn't see it in the other thread, Thomas Chust created a
portable package for Racket. One easy solution is to download and use the
latest version from:
https://bitbucket.org/chust/racket-portable/downloads
That will not just solve the current problems, but also bring the
You can you the backslash shortcuts.
\alpha [alt+\] => α
\beta [alt+\] => β
For more symbols see the docs at:
http://docs.racket-lang.org/drracket/Keyboard_Shortcuts.html#(part._.La.Te.X_and_.Te.X_inspired_keybindings)
[]'s
Rodolfo Carvalho
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 13:27, Adam Shaw wrote:
>
Hi,
On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Thomas Chust wrote:
> The '#' character essentially represents a digit that
> is not known with certainty.
>
> See, for example,
>
> http://www.schemers.org/Documents/Standards/R5RS/HTML/r5rs-Z-H-9.html#%_sec_6.2.4
>
> for further reference.
>
Thanks, that c
How does one type Greek letters into DrRacket on Windows? I'm looking at
DrRacket 5.1.3 on Windows 7.
Thanks --
Regards,
Adam
_
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
Sorry replace Ankur Sethi by Thomas Chust.
Jos
-Original Message-
From: Jos Koot [mailto:jos.k...@telefonica.net]
Sent: viernes, 14 de octubre de 2011 15:23
To: 'Matthew Flatt'
Cc: 'Ankur Sethi'; 'users@racket-lang.org'
Subject: RE: [racket] Postfix hash syntax?
Thanks to Matthew for fi
Thanks to Matthew for fixing and to Ankur Sethi for the clear explanation,
Jos
-Original Message-
From: Matthew Flatt [mailto:mfl...@cs.utah.edu]
Sent: viernes, 14 de octubre de 2011 15:15
To: Jos Koot
Cc: 'Ankur Sethi'; users@racket-lang.org
Subject: Re: [racket] Postfix hash syntax?
I
I see that section 1.3.3 includes `#' in the grammar of inexact
numbers, but it doesn't explain it. I'll fix that.
(As Thomas says, we inherited `#' from RnRS.)
At Fri, 14 Oct 2011 15:06:17 +0200, "Jos Koot" wrote:
> Try how 22.300 is responded to in the repl.
>
> I looked up section 1.3.3 of th
Try how 22.300 is responded to in the repl.
I looked up section 1.3.3 of the Racket Reference. I wonder why this postfix
# notation is included. Does anyone have a clue?
Jos
-Original Message-
From: users-boun...@racket-lang.org [mailto:users-boun...@racket-lang.org]
On Behalf Of Anku
2011/10/14 Ankur Sethi :
> [...]
> I've been wondering what the postfix hash syntax does. This is what
> happens when I append a # to an integer:
>
> > 9#
> 90.0
> > 9##
> 900.0
> > 9#
> 90.0
> [...]
Hello,
if I'm not mistaken, this syntax was introduced by R5RS to indic
Hi,
I've been wondering what the postfix hash syntax does. This is what
happens when I append a # to an integer:
> 9#
90.0
> 9##
900.0
> 9#
90.0
Floating point numbers stay the same:
> 22.3#
22.3
> 22.3##
22.3
> 22.3###
22.3
I can't find
+1, named (check-if ...)
-jpr
Le 14 oct. 2011 à 03:01, users-requ...@racket-lang.org a écrit :
> De : Adam Shaw
> Date : 13 octobre 2011 05:27:01 HAEC
> À : users@racket-lang.org
> Objet : [racket] provide in ISL
>
> Greetings -- Wondering about the possible inclusion of provide in the stud
20 matches
Mail list logo
