Hi -- thanks for the report. However, you should be using plai-typed, not plai.
You can find plai-typed here:
http://cs.brown.edu/courses/cs173/2012/lang/
If you install and run with plai-typed instead of plai, you will find
that the colon-endowed syntax works just fine (I just tested the very
c
Not sure how to proceed with PLAI per
http://cs.brown.edu/courses/cs173/2012/book/Introduction.html The code
seems not to run, e.g.,
#lang plai
(define-type MisspelledAnimal
[caml (humps : number)]
[yacc (height : number)])
actually wants to be
(define-type MisspelledAnimal
[caml (humps n
At Wed, 18 Jun 2014 01:45:08 -0400,
Alexander D. Knauth wrote:
> >> And Is there a reason for the result in the first case being (Vectorof
> >> (U Integer a)) instead of (Vectorof Zero)?
> >
> > Again, convenience.
> >
> > Because vectors are mutable, a `(Vectorof Zero)' is not very useful. You
>
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 7:33 PM, Ryan Davis wrote:
>
> On Jun 18, 2014, at 15:55, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
>
>>> I'll stick to for/list + in-port + read
>>
>> Note that this combination is nicely packaged up as `(port->list)`,
>> and there's a couple optional arguments and also `file->list` for
On Jun 18, 2014, at 15:55, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
>> I'll stick to for/list + in-port + read
>
> Note that this combination is nicely packaged up as `(port->list)`,
> and there's a couple optional arguments and also `file->list` for
> other versions of this.
ooh. I didn't find that last ni
On Jun 18, 2014, at 16:01, Robby Findler wrote:
> Sorry-- I certainly don't dispute any of your comments on the relative
> merit of the code. I was just trying to understand which parts of the
> function touch bad performance in Racket.
It was certainly not taken that way and I'm sorry if my re
Sorry-- I certainly don't dispute any of your comments on the relative
merit of the code. I was just trying to understand which parts of the
function touch bad performance in Racket.
Robby
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Ryan Davis wrote:
>
> On Jun 18, 2014, at 1:26, Robby Findler wrote:
>
>
> I'll stick to for/list + in-port + read
Note that this combination is nicely packaged up as `(port->list)`,
and there's a couple optional arguments and also `file->list` for
other versions of this.
Sam
Racket Users list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
This might still be optimizable in pure Racket; otherwise, mixing Racket
with R might not be a bad idea for this and other reasons.
Details...
I played with this briefly late last night after emails with Ryan,
without finding a substantially faster way that still looked elegant as
Racket code
On Jun 18, 2014, at 1:26, Robby Findler wrote:
> I think the ruby version is smarter than your Racket version.
> Specifically, if you remove the .size (but don't print the output),
> things slow down by a factor of about 2 for me.
>
> $ time ruby -e 'p File.read("X_train.txt").split(/\s+/).map
I think the ruby version is smarter than your Racket version.
Specifically, if you remove the .size (but don't print the output),
things slow down by a factor of about 2 for me.
$ time ruby -e 'p File.read("X_train.txt").split(/\s+/).map(&:to_f)'
> /dev/null
real 0m1.127s
user 0m1.071s
sys 0m0.05
11 matches
Mail list logo
