Thank you for being 'angry'. It can be a good way to improve the world. --
Matthias
On Apr 4, 2013, at 7:51 PM, Tony Garnock-Jones wrote:
> I just tried to register a package with pkg.racket-lang.org. First I
> registered an account, by typing in an email address and fresh password.
>
> The
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 5:32 PM, Lindsey Kuper wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Matthias Felleisen
> wrote:
> >
> > Lindsey, in your case, I believe the 'rabbit hole' can be avoided.
> >
> > From what I understand each family in lambdaLVar is (almost) uniformly
> > generated from a gramm
Many thanks for the advice !
I've start forging ahead with the syntax-property approach since that seems
the most robust and provides the least coupling between the stages.
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 2:39 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Robby Findler
> wrote:
>
I just tried to register a package with pkg.racket-lang.org. First I
registered an account, by typing in an email address and fresh password.
The next step was a webpage prompting me for "Name" and some other
fields. I didn't realise it was asking me for the *package* name, and
thought it was look
On Apr 4, 2013, at 6:48 PM, Lindsey Kuper wrote:
> lambdaLVar is a minimal substrate for LVars, but it's not
> too pleasant to write programs in (although the #lang decoupling could
> help).
That's why I proposed a #lang lambdaLVar in the first place.
You might be able to get all of Racket's i
On Apr 4, 2013, at 6:32 PM, Lindsey Kuper wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Matthias Felleisen
> wrote:
>>
>> Lindsey, in your case, I believe the 'rabbit hole' can be avoided.
>>
>> From what I understand each family in lambdaLVar is (almost) uniformly
>> generated from a grammar 'fun
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 12:31 AM, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> At Tue, 26 Mar 2013 18:29:00 +0100, Pierpaolo Bernardi wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Pierpaolo Bernardi
> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 5:00 PM, Matthew Flatt
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I think you want `reencode-output-por
The new package system is very different than Planet. Planet will
continued to be supported. You don't need to use the new one.
The new package system does not have "internal" linking like Planet,
so your program might be:
(require memoize)
(require graph/dijkstra)
if those packages were convert
If I am a consumer of packages do I need to make any changes to use the new
system?
For example, I have code that has:
(require (planet dherman/memoize:3:1))
(require (planet jaymccarthy/dijkstra:1:2))
What do I do to "point" at planet2?
Thanks,
-joe
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 8:18 AM, Jay McCart
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:19 AM, David Van Horn wrote:
> On 4/4/13 11:15 AM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>> On an unrelated note, you may wish to experiment with lambdaLVar
>> as a #lang so that you can write programs. Since you seem to be
>> designing a PL, I consider the practical evaluation as at
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:15 AM, Matthias Felleisen
wrote:
>
> Lindsey, in your case, I believe the 'rabbit hole' can be avoided.
>
> From what I understand each family in lambdaLVar is (almost) uniformly
> generated from a grammar 'functor' that receives a lattice (let's say
> one for now), compu
Here is a self-contained example that shows how one might do
communication; I believe something like this would work in the context
of the DrRacket evaluator as well, though I haven't tried it yet.
#lang racket
;; Experiment: interaction betw
Write a C wrapper. Thats what llvm does, and how my racket bindings use it.
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Vehm Stark wrote:
> This was discussed on the PLT Scheme list back in 2006 but I wonder if
> anyone has any new advice for doing FFI with a C++ library.
>
> Racket Us
On 4/4/13 11:15 AM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
;; ---
On an unrelated note, you may wish to experiment with lambdaLVar
as a #lang so that you can write programs. Since you seem to be
designing a PL, I consider the practical evaluation as at least
as important as a reduction semantics. Just a thou
In general, the new package system is designed for developers to only
interact with the PNR a single time, to create the package, and never
again. This is why it leverages git/etc so that their normal processes
are "just right".
Since creating an incompatible change creates a "new" package, I thin
Lindsey, in your case, I believe the 'rabbit hole' can be avoided.
>From what I understand each family in lambdaLVar is (almost) uniformly
generated from a grammar 'functor' that receives a lattice (let's say
one for now), computes some grammatical clauses -- and may add some
primitive operati
> > But I see that many packages on Planet2 are using the master as the
> package
> > source. Then how do the developers manage major versions and development?
>
> I believe that most of these developers do not intend to ever break
> compatibility. But if they do, they can tag the last "Version 1"
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Laurent wrote:
> Some questions about Planet 2, using github, but not really used to it.
I think these questions are about the Racket package system, since I
don't know what "Planet 2" is, so I'll answer them. :)
> * Currently, the main files of my projects are at
Some questions about Planet 2, using github, but not really used to it.
* Currently, the main files of my projects are at the root of the git repo.
IIUC, Planet2 requires them to be in a subdirectory of the git repo, so as
to be considered as a collection by Racket, is that correct?
Then where wi
This was discussed on the PLT Scheme list back in 2006 but I wonder if
anyone has any new advice for doing FFI with a C++ library.
Racket Users list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
Robby wrote:
Yes, David's right. The (a bit more long-term than I hoped) plan is to
essentially improve and automate parts of what you call the rabbit hole in
your stackoverflow question (as also discussed in the link David posted).
I ran into this problem in a much simpler context while teach
Thanks Jay. One more good reason to make the switch then!
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Jay McCarthy wrote:
> If you use the new package system with the standard deployment
> mode---git---then the only files that will be distributed are the ones
> that you explicitly add to the git repository
If you use the new package system with the standard deployment
mode---git---then the only files that will be distributed are the ones
that you explicitly add to the git repository. The documentation is
here:
http://docs.racket-lang.org/planet2/
Jay
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 12:13 AM, Laurent wrote
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Robby Findler
wrote:
>
> You can put syntax properties on the result of your expander for the
> state-machine macro and then search for those properties in the expanded
> text. Maybe that will help?
There's information about how Typed Racket does this (using rough
24 matches
Mail list logo
