On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Matthias Felleisen
wrote:
> If these people were serious, Xanadu would get a lot more play. From what I
> can tell, it is a dependently typed language that worked. (But yes, it has
> been abandoned.)
do you mean http://www.cs.bu.edu/~hwxi/Xanadu/Xanadu.html? 'ca
On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
On 2012-09-21 00:54:10 +0200, Thomas Chust wrote:
the documentation for the racket/stream module states that lists can
be used as streams transparently and stream? returns #t when applied
to a list. However, some of the functions operating on streams f
On Thu, 20 Sep 2012, Danny Yoo wrote:
[...]
Other functions that don't work with lists are stream-length, stream-ref,
stream-tail, stream-append, stream-filter? and stream-add-between.
[...]
Yeah, this appears to be a bug in 5.3. But it does appear to be
corrected in the development version o
On 2012-09-21 00:54:10 +0200, Thomas Chust wrote:
> the documentation for the racket/stream module states that lists can
> be used as streams transparently and stream? returns #t when applied
> to a list. However, some of the functions operating on streams fail
> when applied to lists. For example:
Oops, pardon the failure to edit the subject.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Patrick King
Date: Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 7:00 PM
Subject: Re: users Digest, Vol 85, Issue 50
To: users@racket-lang.org
I recently said:
> On Sun, 16 Sep 2012 13:06:42 -0400, Ryan Culpepper
> wrote:
>
>
I recently said:
> On Sun, 16 Sep 2012 13:06:42 -0400, Ryan Culpepper
> wrote:
>
> > >On 09/15/2012 11:05 PM, Patrick King wrote:
> > > Windows 7, latest 64 bit Racket, latest Scriblogify from Planet.
> > >
> > > C:\...\Source\SlowFlight\Blog>raco scriblogify -p SlowFlight
> > 12-09-15.scrbl
> >
Hello,
the documentation for the racket/stream module states that lists can be
used as streams transparently and stream? returns #t when applied to a
list. However, some of the functions operating on streams fail when
applied to lists. For example:
$ racket
Welcome to Racket v5.3.
-> (
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Matthias Felleisen
wrote:
>
> If these people were serious, they would add a row with industrial impact
> measured in $100Ms, but that would make their proof assistants look bad
> because ACL2's value is more than an order of magnitude the addition of all
> othe
Yes, and ACL2 also has proof by reflection.
-Ian
- Original Message -
From: "John Clements"
To: "Carl Eastlund"
Cc: "users@racket-lang.org list" , "Matthias Felleisen"
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 6:40:56 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [racket] I love TR
On Sep 20,
On Sep 20, 2012, at 3:35 PM, Carl Eastlund wrote:
> [possibly off-topic]
>
> Is it weird to anyone else that the dependent type comparison table, as well
> as the proof assistant comparison table linked right above it, seem to assume
> that proof assistants and dependently typed languages are
If these people were serious, they would add a row with industrial impact
measured in $100Ms, but that would make their proof assistants look bad because
ACL2's value is more than an order of magnitude the addition of all others.
;; ---
If these people were serious, Xanadu would get a lot mo
[possibly off-topic]
Is it weird to anyone else that the dependent type comparison table, as
well as the proof assistant comparison table linked right above it, seem to
assume that proof assistants and dependently typed languages are
synonymous? This assumption, for instance, makes ACL2 look abso
On Sep 20, 2012, at 2:49 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
> Duplicating the row for Sage looks fine :-)
Hope you weren't joking:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dependent_type#Comparison
On a related note, someone should probably add a more prominent section on TR
in the Racket wikipedia page.
Duplicating the row for Sage looks fine :-)
On Sep 20, 2012, at 5:38 PM, John Clements wrote:
>
> On Sep 20, 2012, at 2:27 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Are you sure that you blew your entire budget on this email?
>>
>> TR is a dependently typed language. While types don't ent
On Sep 20, 2012, at 2:27 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
>
> Are you sure that you blew your entire budget on this email?
>
> TR is a dependently typed language. While types don't entire values, they
> depend on those 'aspects' of values (is it a cons? is it a positive value?)
> that can be
Are you sure that you blew your entire budget on this email?
TR is a dependently typed language. While types don't entire values, they
depend on those 'aspects' of values (is it a cons? is it a positive value?)
that can be checked with (usually cheap) predicates.
On Sep 20, 2012, at 5:21
… and I don't mean Teddy Roosevelt.
TR just discovered a bug that other type systems totally wouldn't have. As a
side-benefit, it appears that TR should be able to generate substantially
faster code as a result.
Short synopsis:
I have inner-loop code that's using 'modulo'. As it turns out, mo
Technically this should be possible and conceptually preferable.
However, it does come with redundancies that conventional type annotations
avoid and I am not sure how much of this redundancy we should push on
programmers.
On Sep 20, 2012, at 4:51 PM, Patrick Mahoney wrote:
> Hey all,
>
Not everyone loves OAuth 2.0. One person who doesn't is its lead
author/editor, who resigned and withdrew his name from the spec at the
end of July.
"When compared with OAuth 1.0, the 2.0 specification is more complex,
less interoperable, less useful, more incomplete, and most
importantly, less se
Hey all,
One feature of typed racket that makes translation between untyped and
typed code somewhat less simple than adding or removing type signatures is
that certain forms require rewriting/alteration of the untyped form itself.
Others allow stand-alone declaration of the types prior to the for
On Sep 20, 2012, at 12:27 PM, Ryan Culpepper wrote:
> On 09/20/2012 01:45 PM, John Clements wrote:
>> I have a student (cc:ed) that noticed that there's an OAuth 2.0
>> library for Racket, but no OAuth 1.0 library. Apparently, there are
>> some differences, so that you can't use OAuth 2.0 to impl
On 09/20/2012 01:45 PM, John Clements wrote:
I have a student (cc:ed) that noticed that there's an OAuth 2.0
library for Racket, but no OAuth 1.0 library. Apparently, there are
some differences, so that you can't use OAuth 2.0 to implement (say)
an interaction with Twitter. Can anyone with OAuth
> Thanks for the help. The domain was about trying to get the output of a
> csv into
> a struct. I had already solved (badly) the problem with
>
> (define-syntax list->tst
> (syntax-rules ()
> [(_ attr-list) (apply tst (syntax->datum #`(#,@attr-list)))]))
>
> But solving it directly through t
I have a student (cc:ed) that noticed that there's an OAuth 2.0 library for
Racket, but no OAuth 1.0 library. Apparently, there are some differences, so
that you can't use OAuth 2.0 to implement (say) an interaction with Twitter.
Can anyone with OAuth experience confirm this, and also the absenc
Hello Danny,
Thanks for the help. The domain was about trying to get the output of a csv into
a struct. I had already solved (badly) the problem with
(define-syntax list->tst
(syntax-rules ()
[(_ attr-list) (apply tst (syntax->datum #`(#,@attr-list)))]))
But solving it directly through th
Thank you all for the replies.
I'll give it a try.
Racket Users list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
At Thu, 20 Sep 2012 02:41:02 -0400 (EDT),
thorso...@lavabit.com wrote:
> > The required "translation" step will be mostly
> > removing the type declarations. Doing the same with Haskell etc would
> > most likely be much harder.
>
> Is it possible not to remove types?
Yes. A Typed Racket is a Rac
On Sep 20, 2012, at 2:41 AM, thorso...@lavabit.com wrote:
> Is it possible not to remove types?
> Vincent told me that one can "mix typed and untyped code" in Racket.
> How it's done in Racket (the implementation details)? How these modules
> interact? Could you give me some pointers?
1. Typed
28 matches
Mail list logo
