In racket you are applying function "base64-encode" and in python you are not.
Sorry if I didn't get your question.
Veer.
On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 9:38 AM, Shawn Smith wrote:
> Having issues with mailing list. Trying again:
>
> I've gotten a bit of help in #racket on freenode so far, but I'm st
Having issues with mailing list. Trying again:
I've gotten a bit of help in #racket on freenode so far, but I'm still
facing a problem with this.
In Racket, I expect that this will get me a SHA1 hash (as bytes) of a
string, using a key:
(require web-server/stuffers/hmac-sha1
net/bas
Boston Lisp Meeting:
Thursday 2012-05-17
Zach Beane on Quicklisp
http://fare.livejournal.com/166595.html
A Boston Lisp Meeting will take place on Thursday, May 17th 2012 at 1800 at MIT
32-D4
Hi,
I'm trying to generate a SHA1 hash using a private key and a given string,
like so:
(define a-hash (HMAC-SHA1 (string->bytes/locale "foo")
(string->bytes/locale "bar")))
This returns bytes, but when I try to turn those bytes into a string with:
(bytes->string/locale a-hash)
I get:
bytes->
I think you probably have to recur when it is a pair, as the
properties can get cons'd together multiple times.
On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Jens Axel Søgaard
wrote:
> 2012/5/13 Danny Yoo :
>> Does this apply?
>> http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev/archive/2012-March/009205.html
>
> Yes!
>
> Th
Thanks Eli,
This is what I was looking for, something short and crystal clear.
I've shortened it even more. My data is actually a list of lists
which I had converted to a vector of vectors, so I've deferred that
for now. I've also used Matthias' macro of let** he shared the other
day so now I've
On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 1:01 AM, Jay McCarthy wrote:
> primitive? is only defined on values.
>
> thunk, let, lambda, etc are not values.
>
> They are syntactic forms and thus, for example, the expression
>
> (primitive? let)
>
> represents an ill-formed let expression (indeed, so does 'let')
Ano
Just now, Harry Spier wrote:
> Thanks Neil,
>
> Each vector is in the order of about a thousand cells and there are
> about a thousand of these vectors that are processed at one time.
> So as long as I can do that in 10 or 20 seconds thats fine. So as
> long as its "relatively efficient" I think
Thanks Neil,
Each vector is in the order of about a thousand cells and there are
about a thousand of these vectors that are processed at one time. So
as long as I can do that in 10 or 20 seconds thats fine. So as long
as its "relatively efficient" I think I'm OK. Whats just as important
to me,
> The problem "feels" like a state machine problem, in that we can
> imagine a machine in either one of two states: we're searching for the
> start of a sequence of ones, or looking for the end of a sequence of
> ones. We can represent being in a state via function call. The
> following code is o
On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Harry Spier wrote:
> Is there a better way to do this iin Racket (shorter, clearer, more readable)?
The problem "feels" like a state machine problem, in that we can
imagine a machine in either one of two states: we're searching for the
start of a sequence of ones,
Harry Spier wrote at 05/13/2012 04:47 PM:
Is there a better way to do this iin Racket (shorter, clearer, more readable)?
If this you are doing large numbers of this operation, and you are
performance-sensitive, I suggest that one of your top criteria for
``better'' should be *efficiency*.
Here's my shot using generators. It's probably much slower than yours
due to all the continuation jumps. This way keeps all four states in
your "state machine" in one place.
;;
(require racket/generator)
(define (list-of-ranges-of-ones v)
(define vec (append (vec
HP Wei wrote at 05/13/2012 03:53 PM:
Suppose I am on a master machine A
and there are two other machines B and C.
On A, in racket, I would like to programatically initiate
one server on B and another on C.
The 'server' is presumably a 'repl' that can execute a block
of code, sent from A.
[ Let
Is there a better way to do this iin Racket (shorter, clearer, more readable)?
I have vectors of 1's and 0's (each vector representing a row of black
and white pixels. I need to transform each vector into a list of
pairs. Each pair containing the start and end vector-ref's of a
contiguous segmen
A few minutes ago, Danny Yoo wrote:
> Does this apply? http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev/archive/2012-March/
> 009205.html
Looks like it -- I change `curly?' to
(define-for-syntax (curly? stx)
(eprintf ">>> ~s -> ~s\n" stx (syntax-property stx 'paren-shape))
(eq? (syntax-property stx 'p
2012/5/13 Danny Yoo :
> Does this apply?
> http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev/archive/2012-March/009205.html
Yes!
The test for curliness must take the (cons orig new)
new possibility into account, and then it just works.
Thanks.
/Jens Axel
(define-for-syntax (curly? stx)
(let ([p (syntax-pr
Would you please suggest to me some links so that I can
get some info or even better some sample racket codes for below task ?
---
Suppose I am on a master machine A
and there are two other machines B and C.
On A, in racket, I would like to
Thank you !! Yes, now it's better... but i'm not sure to understand the
"library" concept...
On my project, I have 3 files :
projet_class.rkt : all class are defined here (porte% etc...)
it starts with (provide (all-defined-out))
projet_definitions.rkt : most of all definitions I use in
projet_i
Does this apply?
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev/archive/2012-March/009205.html
On Sunday, May 13, 2012, Jens Axel Søgaard wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> I am playing around with the paren-shape syntax property
> in order to use {} for polynomials.
>
> The case {+ p q r ...} is causing me problems.
>
> I
Hi All,
I am playing around with the paren-shape syntax property
in order to use {} for polynomials.
The case {+ p q r ...} is causing me problems.
I have reduced the problem to the example below.
I'd like {+ 2 3 5} to expand to (* (* 2 3) 5) and thus evaluate to 30.
However as is {+ 2 3 5} exp
Do you have a `defmodule' declaration? That is, your documentation
source should look something like this:
#lang scribble/manual
@(require (for-label racket
mylib))
@title{Documentation}
...
@defmodule[mylib]
...
@(defclass porte% object% {and% or% not% nand%}
Hi
I'm writing a Scheme project documentation with Scribble, and I have this
error :
WARNING: no declared exporting libraries for definition
I've understood that I should write something like "declare-exporting ..."
but I don't understand why... I don't need to export anything, all my
documentat
23 matches
Mail list logo
