On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 7:53 PM, Nick Sivo wrote:
> After fighting with defmacro for a while I ended up abandoning it and
> implementing what I need with syntax/parse instead. This requires
> re-writing the arc macros, but that isn't all bad since their new
> forms are generally shorter, clearer,
Thanks Matthias for yet again looking at my attempt at this exercise!
Agreed Stephen, yes the purpose statement is not as clear as it could be.
Great list, great book, great software.
Regards,
Sean Kemplay
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 10:21 PM, Matthias Felleisen
wrote:
>
> On Jul 12, 2012, at 5:1
On Jul 12, 2012, at 5:14 PM, Stephen Bloch wrote:
> The only quibble I would raise is with the purpose statement for "make-words":
>> ;; make-words symbol list of words -> list of words
>> ;; Given a symbol and a list of (partial) words, start
>> ;; back filling with the symbol producing a new li
On Jul 12, 2012, at 4:40 PM, Sean Kemplay wrote:
> Ok, here is another shot - this time, like arrangements, making a list
> of words from the base case of insert-everywhere/in-all-words to feed
> to make words.
Lovely. Contracts and test cases for each function, each function does a
clearly-sp
Looking simple, elegant and correct. Onward -- Matthias
Racket Users list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
Ok, here is another shot - this time, like arrangements, making a list
of words from the base case of insert-everywhere/in-all-words to feed
to make words.
;; Word -> [Listof Word]
(check-expect (arrangements '(a)) (list '(a)))
(check-expect (arrangements '(a b)) (list '(a b) '(b a)))
(define (a
I'm developing on Windows, though the server will definitely be
staying on BSD for this and many other good reasons :)
I'm working on making Arc play nice as a Racket language, and would
like my runtime to work on Windows without compromising security.
-Nick
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Nei
Sounds like you might be talking about an incident from a few years ago,
involving Web server software implemented in Arc.
If that's the software, I assume you have your reasons for moving to
Windows, but I'm curious why not stay on GNU/Linux, like most servers,
where you already have both "/d
Thanks, I was sure that I couldn't have been the first to need this.
I'm sure either of those will be fine for session keys.
The project previously experienced real-world exploitation of its
initial use of random and a fairly predictable seed.
-Nick
Racket Users list:
htt
Kieron Hardy wrote at 07/12/2012 01:38 PM:
Thanks for the tip, Neil.
Does anyone know then if I can I assume dict-keys on an alist will
continue to return the keys in list order and even if it could/should
be documented that way?
I'm not surprised that "dict-keys", being a generalized operat
I might be wrong but MRG32k3a doesn't seem to have been cryptanalyzed
extensively enough to count as cryptographically secure. Probably it
isn't.
The crypto library on Planet has random-bytes and
random-bytes! that ought to be more secure. (However, I do not know the
code OpenSSL uses to gather en
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12-07-12 02:10, Nick Sivo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does there exist in Racket a cross-platform way to generate
> cryptographically secure[1] pseudorandom numbers? Some code I'm
> currently working on directly uses /dev/urandom which would be fine
> if I
> If you have time, please visit:
>
> http://hashcollision.org/tmp/test-rpc-access.html
>
> and press the "Good" and "Bad" buttons. You should see two different
> alerts come up.
Thanks to everyone for the test results! I got enough confirmations
that I'm more comfortable in using the new me
13 matches
Mail list logo
