On 03/16/2013 08:47 PM, Eric Nadeau wrote:
I'm ditching Scheme altogether based on this...
In case you're not trolling: changing languages won't help. This is
standard behavior. And for goodness sake, you can always write your own
function!
Neil ⊥
Racket Users list:
On Mar 16, 2013, at 11:47 PM, Eric Nadeau wrote:
> The point of rounding is coming up with the best possible integer
> approximation for a decimal and this nearest even number rule does not
> qualify.
Why not? In these cases there is no "the" best possible integer approximation,
but two equ
> The point of rounding is coming up with the best possible integer
> approximation for a decimal and this nearest even number rule does not
> qualify. This "logic" was used by my grandparents' generation because odd
> numbers were seen as less pure than even ones.
This is a strawman argument.
Four hours ago, Laurent wrote:
> Thank you Robby, yes it helps.
>
> Based on this, I gave a try at writing a small example that
> describes some particularities of using yield or sync or creating a
> new eventspace with or without a thread: [...]
I think that like Robby said, `yield' should be t
Racket is not Scheme. Please do not let our decisions influence your
opinion of other languages. Go try Scheme for real.
Robby
On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 10:47 PM, Eric Nadeau wrote:
>
> The point of rounding is coming up with the best possible integer
> approximation for a decimal and this near
The point of rounding is coming up with the best possible integer approximation
for a decimal and this nearest even number rule does not qualify. This "logic"
was used by my grandparents' generation because odd numbers were seen as less
pure than even ones.
I'm ditching Scheme altogether based
Thank you Robby, yes it helps.
Based on this, I gave a try at writing a small example that describes some
particularities of using yield or sync or creating a new eventspace with or
without a thread:
https://gist.github.com/Metaxal/5182719#file-gistfile1-rkt
The comments at the bottom describe th
For this specific program, it would behave the same way. In general what
yield means is "block on this evt, but while you're blocked handle GUI
events". So you call it from the eventspace handler thread of some
eventspace, then that eventspace can still handle events while the evt
passed to yield i
In his second version (see below), Matthew was basically encapsulating what
you have written inside (yield ...).
Would you mind to explain what differences that makes? I've read the docs
but I'm still confused about `yield'.
>> >> > #lang at-exp racket
>> >> > (require plot
>> >> >
That way has the property that each plot window has its own thread of
execution, which is probably not necessary (I don't know if plot windows
communicate or if that matters), but if it were me, I'd probably just make
one extra thread, not N, and I'd put the reading into the extra thread not
the GU
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 1:15 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> On Thursday, Robby Findler wrote:
> > Also: I don't think that you need a parameter for this default. the
> > current-eventspace parameter would already do this job.
>
> IOW, Robby wants no keyword or parameter, just the default behavior,
> a
So, does this means that Deren's program from
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/2012-April/051490.html
would then look like that:
#lang racket
(require plot)
(plot-new-window? #t)
(let loop ()
(let ((dummy (read)))
(if (and (number? dummy) (zero? dummy))
(void)
(begi
12 matches
Mail list logo
