In the following program, "loop 2 finished" is never printed, even
though `i' loops over nothing. As far as I understand, the second loop
shouldn't iterate at all - it should stop as soon as the `i' sequence is
finished, which is immediately. But I could be wrong, so I'm asking: is
this a bug?
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Ismael Figueroa Palet
wrote:
> I need to compare to procedures for equality. In the untyped version of the
> code I used eq? and it worked for my purposes.
> Now, in the Typed Racket version I'm having the problem that somehow one of
> the procedures is wrapped in
Just a shot in the dark, but if you know the type of the procedures,
then you might try to annotate the struct with the type.
Robby
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Matthias Felleisen
wrote:
>
> In the works Sam would say -- Matthias
>
> On Nov 24, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Ismael Figueroa Palet wrote:
Yes. When caps lock is on, pressing Cmd+N inserts an "n" into the
current document.
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Neil Toronto wrote:
> For either of you, does turning on Caps Lock do it as well? DrRacket does
> this weird thing on my Ubuntu box, where CTRL- inserts a
> capitalized when Caps
In the works Sam would say -- Matthias
On Nov 24, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Ismael Figueroa Palet wrote:
> Thanks Robby for your answer,
>
> When I create an annotated-proc (as in
> http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/procedures.html)
>
> Unfortunately it seems that I lose type information:
>
> >
Those are known as "semantic brackets." They denote a syntactic form into its
ideal mathematical object. In a sense, they give "meaning" to what they
surround.
-Ian
- Original Message -
From: Patrick Li
To: Matthias Felleisen
Cc: users@racket-lang.org
Sent: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 17:05:30 -05
It is often used to represent a function that applies on a term, or an
expression.
[ t ] means the function [] applied to t.
In those papers, it often represent a CPS transform.
Like [ x ] = \ k . k x would mean "the cps transform of 'x' is '\ k .
k x' , or cps(x) = \ k . k x.
Using [ _ ] is
Good evening, gentlemen.
I'm studying
http://docs.racket-lang.org/web-server/templates.html
to see how web development is done in Racket. Having written a first
hello world using templates, I'm wishing to use the @in[] call. So I
wrote
%cat templates1.rkt
#lang racket
(require web-server/serv
Thanks for the feedback. The literature references are extremely helpful,
and I will read through them carefully.
As an aside, may I ask what notation is being used in these papers?
I thought it might be lambda calculus, however I cannot determine what it
means to surround an expression using call
Thanks Robby for your answer,
When I create an annotated-proc (as in
http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/procedures.html)
Unfortunately it seems that I lose type information:
> (annotated-proc (lambda (x) x) (gensym))
- : annotated-proc
#
> (lambda (x) x)
- : (Any -> Any : ((! False @ 0) | (
Not a direct answer to your question, but comparing procedures for
equality using eq? can be fragile (contracts will break the equality,
depending on how you use them, for example).
You might instead use applicable structs to implement the equality by
putting some token you use for equality into a
I need to compare to procedures for equality. In the untyped version of the
code I used eq? and it worked for my purposes.
Now, in the Typed Racket version I'm having the problem that somehow one of
the procedures is wrapped in a "typed value" struct while the other is not.
When I display the valu
The caps-lock key doesn't affect what I see.
I normally have caps-lock mapped to control for the convenience of my left
pinkie, but when I undo the mapping I see the same results with caps lock
on and caps lock off. A lower case 'r' appears in the definitions or repl
window when I do Command-R (or
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Neil Toronto wrote:
> For either of you, does turning on Caps Lock do it as well? DrRacket does
> this weird thing on my Ubuntu box, where CTRL- inserts a
> capitalized when Caps Lock is on, instead of invoking a shortcut.
>
> I haven't reported it yet because I t
Hey there, Racketeers! Hope you're having a nice thanksgiving if
you're in America.
(send) supports apply-style calling by calling it with a dotted
parameter. How can I call a method with a list of *keyword*
arguments? I essentially want to do keyword-apply but on a
method, and I don't quite have
For either of you, does turning on Caps Lock do it as well? DrRacket
does this weird thing on my Ubuntu box, where CTRL- inserts a
capitalized when Caps Lock is on, instead of invoking a shortcut.
I haven't reported it yet because I thought it might be an Ubuntu thing
only - it seemed to star
Matthias Felleisen wrote at 11/24/2011 10:12 AM:
Is the OO style required?
I believe that OO style is *not* required, per vague statements and
phrasing in
"https://github.com/aichallenge/aichallenge/wiki/Ants-Starter-Pack-Guide";.
Looks like the hardest part of writing the starter kit is th
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Ismael Figueroa Palet
wrote:
> I got the following error: "Type Checker: Cannot apply expression of type
> Procedure, since it is not a function type"
>
> What is the rationale behind this?
Probably the error message should be better here, but what's going on
is
I got the following error: "Type Checker: Cannot apply expression of type
Procedure, since it is not a function type"
What is the rationale behind this?
I'm constructing a function wrapper that uses apply, but I don't know how
to type a function in the most general way.
The code is like:
(defin
FWIW, this is what happens at runtime:
> ((let () (struct s (x)) s-x) (let () (struct s (x)) (s 1)))
s-x: expects args of type ; given instance of a different
Robby
On Thu, Nov 24, 2011 at 8:39 AM, Ismael Figueroa Palet
wrote:
> I'm using require/typed for a struct P in two different files, bu
Is the OO style required?
On Nov 23, 2011, at 4:26 PM, Wayne Iba wrote:
> Yes, sorry I'm responsible for that abomination of a "starter-package
> starter". Actually, I could blame Neil for the idea but I wont. Two of my
> students and I took the Common Lisp starter package and translated t
On Nov 24, 2011, at 9:52 AM, nicolas.o...@gmail.com wrote:
>> But you could also break the tail-call discipline of CPS and translate
>> [shift e] as \k. (k [e](\x.x))
>> Or you can use our 'abstract' continuations to manipulate a stack of
>> continuations directly.
>
> What are your 'abstract
> But you could also break the tail-call discipline of CPS and translate [shift
> e] as \k. (k [e](\x.x))
> Or you can use our 'abstract' continuations to manipulate a stack of
> continuations directly.
What are your 'abstract' continuations? Sounds very interesting.
On Nov 24, 2011, at 2:31 AM, Patrick Li wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> Does anyone know of a guide on how delimited continuations (reset/shift) can
> be implemented using a CPS transform? There is a paper for doing this in
> Scala, but I don't have a CS background and cannot understand the nota
I'm using require/typed for a struct P in two different files, but with
exactly the same imports.
When, in a third file I get a mismatch because the P are different I got a
message:
"Type Checker: Expected P, but got P"
At first I didn't understand the error, maybe you could put something like:
A `@para{ ... @verbatim[]}' doesn't work because `verbatim' generates a
block, which is at the same level as a paragraph and cannot appear
within a paragraph.
Using `begin' works at the top level, since it splices the two blocks
into the top-level flow. Using `list' would work more generally, such
I think your solution is perfectly sensible.
shift/reset needs two CPS transformations. Then you have two
continuations : one local (up to the next reset), one global
(from the next reset to the toplevel). The global one is usually
called the meta-continuation, and often denoted m.
I think this i
27 matches
Mail list logo
