Hi All,
I'm trying to execute Racket code with reduced permissions. My intent is
that the sandboxed code will be rendering content to be displayed by
the application.
I can create an evaluator with the following function:
(define sandbox
(call-with-trusted-sandbox-configuration
(lambda ()
I am not familiar with Mac yet, thanks for your prompt.
Now that Command & Option have their own usage and there is a large number
of emacs users in Mac, it seems like what we should do is simply copying the
emacs keybindings until a better solution be found.
At 2014-01-01 10:49:08,"Piotr Kalino
Robby Findler
writes:
> Just in case: the package should probably not change the meta/command
> settings. That is something that only a user should configure
> explicitly.
Yeah, I've figured that much after finding that option in preferences.
> On Tuesday, December 31, 2013, 钟 wrote:
>
>> Accor
Just in case: the package should probably not change the meta/command
settings. That is something that only a user should configure explicitly.
Robby
On Tuesday, December 31, 2013, 钟 wrote:
> Thank you very much, Piotr.
> I don't have a Mac now, so I have no chance to do test on Mac by
> myself.
Thank you very much, Piotr.
I don't have a Mac now, so I have no chance to do test on Mac by myself.Thank
you for your help.
According to the document, Command is mapped to Meta when
'map-command-as-meta-key' produces #t, or we can use "d:" for command.
It should be better to set it to #t by def
MysterX is deprecated because there is a newer interface: the
`racket/com` library.
The documentation for `racket/com` is here:
http://docs.racket-lang.org/foreign/com.html
That documentation doesn't try to explain COM, though, and I'm not sure
where to point you, so I hope someone else here ca
Hi Evan,
I was planning on working on this per your previous email to the list.
Basically all that needs to be done is document datalog/runtime and
maybe provide some helpers for constructing queries via datalog/ast.
The runtime is very simple:
(provide/contract
[safe-clause? (clause? . -> . b
I use a proprietary program which recently has had a user interface
added to it, consisting of an ActiveX DLL.
Details are at http://www.sky-software.com/developer/ - one can send
commands to the program and
retrieve data from it. It can be called from Visual Basic for
Applications or, for tho
Yes, you can do it with a struct with the property prop:procedure.
#lang racket
(require rackunit)
(struct my-proc (proc str)
#:property prop:procedure (struct-field-index proc))
(define f
(my-proc (lambda (x) (+ x 1))
"(lambda (x) (+ x 1))"))
(check-true (procedure? f))
(chec
Piotr Kalinowski
writes:
> However, notice that instead of C-( and C-) that are used in Emacs as
> alternatives for slurpage, I had to use C-[ and C-]. For some reason,
> when I try to input C-( or C-) in DrRacket I end up with just 9 or 0 (is
> it a bug in GUI?).
I tried different ways of getti
Not sure that's what you really want, but you can use a simple macro to get
both the procedure and the corresponding string when defining the procedure:
#lang racket
;; Macro:
(define-syntax-rule (lambda+string args body ...)
(values
(lambda args body ...)
(~a '(lambda args body ...
inline
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Scott Klarenbach wrote:
> Matthias,
>
...
> As an aside:
>
>
>> This might be a MIT misunderstanding about the relationship between
>> Scheme and the lambda calculus. It is certainly not possible in general and
>> I see no pragmatic use case for an approx
钟 writes:
> I used to write lisp code in emacs and enjoy paredit-mode.I tried to
> find an alternative for DrRacket but found nothing, so I decided to do
> it on my own. I has written a prototype in one day at
> https://github.com/yjqww6/drracket-paredit , and implemented
> Depth-Changing, Barfa
Hello,
is there any way to transform a function's body to a string such as
"(lambda(x)...)"?
Thanks
Alegria
Racket Users list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
14 matches
Mail list logo
