Yes, the 64-bit linux build will use Ubuntu 12.04 starting with Racket v6.0.
Ryan
On 01/28/2014 04:16 AM, Tobias Hammer wrote:
Great new version!
I noticed that there is only a build for ubuntu platform. Will at least
one of the other (older distribution) ones come back? Also the builds
for u
Oh, right.
And your numbers are 4-5x better than mine, (presumably because linux's
filesystem is faster than mac os x's).
Robby
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt
wrote:
> I think you mean `racket/init` in the second version, right?
>
> For me, I get (slightly edited for cla
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Robby Findler
wrote:
> And your numbers are 4-5x better than mine, (presumably because linux's
> filesystem is faster than mac os x's).
Yes, and I have a generally too-fast computer.
Sam
Racket Users list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/us
I think you mean `racket/init` in the second version, right?
For me, I get (slightly edited for clarity):
$ echo '(exit)' | time racket -vl racket/base -e '(read-eval-print-loop)'
Welcome to Racket v6.0.0.2.
>
0.02user 0.01system 0:00.03elapsed
vs
$ echo '(exit)' | time racket -vl racket/in
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 9:11 AM, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
>
> The Racket VM startup time is longer than it used to be, and I no longer
> use it often as a quick command-line calculator. (If filesystem and
> libraries aren't in Linux caches, it's almost 4 seconds before REPL prompt
> on my workstatio
Looks like most of the size increase from racket/date is that you're
pulling in the contract system. Still, there was some dead code in that
file whose removal let me remove a few requires from it (eliminating a
dependency on racket/match, since none of the things racket/date requires
require it).
On Wed, 12 Feb 2014 06:07:17 -0700
Matthew Flatt wrote:
> At Wed, 12 Feb 2014 06:02:30 +0100, Manfred Lotz wrote:
> > I just read Neil van Dyke's statement:
> >
> > < "#lang racket" is for demos, IMHO; I *always* use "#lang
> > racket/base" < for any code that's not a demo.
> >
> > Question: Wh
Although I could be mistaken about any/all of the following, I'll go
out on a limb -- and once there, jump up and down.
> < "#lang racket" is for demos, IMHO; I *always* use "#lang racket/base"
> < for any code that's not a demo.
>
> Question: What are the advantages of doing requires explicitly?
At Wed, 12 Feb 2014 06:02:30 +0100, Manfred Lotz wrote:
> I just read Neil van Dyke's statement:
>
> < "#lang racket" is for demos, IMHO; I *always* use "#lang racket/base"
> < for any code that's not a demo.
>
> Question: What are the advantages of doing requires explicitly?
>
> In a program o
9 matches
Mail list logo
