I've seen this technique recommended numerous times. Would anyone have a
link to an idiomatic example of the technique in use? Thank you.
Racket Users list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
Does it eventually come back?
You don't, by any chance, type a ] with either alt-gr down or with some
other modifier?
Robby
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 7:13 PM, Joe Gilray wrote:
> FYI, I've been getting DrRacket "not responding"s quite a bit on both
> 64-bit and 32-bit 5.3.5 installations on Win
FYI, I've been getting DrRacket "not responding"s quite a bit on both
64-bit and 32-bit 5.3.5 installations on Windows 7. It happens right away
about 25% of the time that I bring up DrRacket on a 3300 line file. It
seems to get about through parsing the file when I get the "not responding"
messag
On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Nick Shelley wrote:
> Since I'm not very experienced in this at all, I thought I'd ask the list
> what definition of DSL is most correct and adopt that one. Any thoughts will
> be appreciated.
It depends who is defining it.
Java doesn't have rich syntactic extens
As said in SICP, "eval" is the ultimate language interpreter, capable of
implementing anything computable. You could feed it code (a language)
to interpret C code (the DSL to interpret C, so this code in turn takes
a parameter of the C to interpret just as eval takes a parameter of the
Scheme
--> ls -lh
/usr/local/lib/racket/collects/scribblings/main/private/make-search.rkt
-rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 9.8K Jun 18 09:07
/usr/local/lib/racket/collects/scribblings/main/private/make-search.rkt
--> ls -lh
/usr/local/lib/racket/collects/scribblings/main/private/compiled/make-search_rkt.z
I think it's a DSL less in the use of the fluent API and more in the
over-utilization of strings as unstringlike things. There must be a
fair bit of interpreting going on for those strings to mean anything,
to lex and parse them into more meaningful structures to Camel. But
yes, I think the relianc
The simplicity and DSL thread mentioned Java DSLs, and I came across an
example of one at http://camel.apache.org/java-dsl.html.
To me, this isn't really a DSL, it's more of a programming pattern. One of
the usage patterns on the wiki page for DSL is embedded DSL that uses the
syntax of the host l
It looks like `raco setup' thinks that the bytecode form of
"scribblings/main/private/make-search.rkt"
is out of date, and so it's trying to recompile the file.
What is the timestamp on "make-search.rkt"? Does the file
"compiled/make-search_rkt.zo" exist, and if so, what is its timestamp?
At
Why raco requires write permissions to /usr?
--> raco pkg install --scope user frog
The following packages are listed as dependencies, but are not currently
installed:
markdown rackjure
Would you like to install them via your package indices? [Yn]
raco setup: version: 5.3.5 [3m]
raco se
I know, what is the problem.
(Listof (Listof String)) is too wide. It allows '(() ("a" "b")), that is
inusable for assoc.
So you should promise your sublists not to be empty.
(define: mystringlistlist : (Listof (Pairof String (Listof String))) (list
(list "a"
"b") (list "c" "d")))
(assoc "a"
The type error is real and predicts a potential bug in your code.
First, here is how to fix it:
#lang typed/racket
(define: mystringlistlist : (Listof (cons String (Listof String))) (list (list
"a" "b") (list "c" "d")))
(define: mystringpairlist : (Listof (Pairof String String)) (list (cons
On Jun 23, 2013, at 8:34 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
>>
>> After porting nearly everything I was left with typing up the command-line
>> parser. However, I am getting a type error at the following simplified part:
>
> Here's a version that type checks: https://gist.github.com/samth/5847063
>
Sam Tobin-Hochstadt writes:
> Can you say more about the problem here? The type of `assoc` mentions
> pairs, but you should be able to use it with lists, since they're made
> of pairs.
Yeah, that's what I had expected as well. This code produces type errors (in
5.3.3, too):
;; Definitions
The thing is that using two {}s is actually useful for curried
functions. For example:
#lang scribble/text
@(define ((foo . text1) . text2)
@list{1. @text1
2. @text2})
@@foo{blah blah blah}{foo bar baz}
and this extension holds for a [] that follows a {}.
But there is a li
15 matches
Mail list logo
