On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt
wrote:
> I've now created a wiki page for this, with some initial content:
> https://github.com/plt/racket/wiki/Courses-using-Racket
>
And now it's up to 22 revisions! Thanks for creating, Sam, and to everyone
who added to it.
On Tue, Sep 16
I just realized that typed racket seems to ignore the guard anyway, so I could
do something like this and convince the type-checker that any value I want has
any type that I want:
(struct (a) foo ([a : a])
#:guard (lambda (a _) "this value"))
(: x : (foo 1))
(define x (foo 1))
> (foo-a x)
-
You might be able to unwrap such things for a local context, but then you need
to wrap it again on the way out. That cost might become quite high if it
happens in a loop. Then again Racket programs rely on this a lot too (as do
many dynamically typed programs) so it might not be a cost that kil
On Sep 28, 2014, at 8:25 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
> Your message points out where gradual typing badly fails.
>
> Type systems combine two nearly orthogonal ideas: (1) proving theorems about
> your program and (2) bridging the gap between abstract linguistic constructs
> and c
Your message points out where gradual typing badly fails.
Type systems combine two nearly orthogonal ideas: (1) proving theorems about
your program and (2) bridging the gap between abstract linguistic constructs
and concrete machine implementations. In a sense, the design of a type sys
Yes I do want run-time residual of the dimensions, and yes I want a unit
struct.
Also if there’s run-time residual, then I can use predicates and occurrence
typing, and it can also be used in untyped code with contracts instead of
types.
And also the type-checker would check if it is dimen
If you want the type checker to ensure your program is unit-correct, I assume
you also want no run-time residual of the dimensions but that is in conflict
with wanting a structure because it imposes a run-time cost. Are you sure you
want a unit? -- Matthias
On Sep 28, 2014, at 1:37 PM, Al
If you're in a hurry you could remove and re-install directly from GitHub:
$ raco pkg remove aws
$ raco pkg install git://github.com/greghendershott/aws
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Norman Gray wrote:
>
> On 2014 Sep 28, at 22:17, Greg Hendershott wrote:
>
I clicked "update" on pkgs.
On 2014 Sep 28, at 22:17, Greg Hendershott wrote:
>>> I clicked "update" on pkgs.racket-lang.org. But it seems to be slower
>>> than usual to refresh. After it does, you can `raco pkg update aws` to
>>> get the fix.
>>
>> Something seems wrong/stuck on pkgs.racket-lang.org. The top of the page
>> I clicked "update" on pkgs.racket-lang.org. But it seems to be slower
>> than usual to refresh. After it does, you can `raco pkg update aws` to
>> get the fix.
>
> Something seems wrong/stuck on pkgs.racket-lang.org. The top of the page says:
>
> "update upload in progress: there may be incons
> I clicked "update" on pkgs.racket-lang.org. But it seems to be slower
> than usual to refresh. After it does, you can `raco pkg update aws` to
> get the fix.
Something seems wrong/stuck on pkgs.racket-lang.org. The top of the page says:
"update upload in progress: there may be inconsistencies
I pushed a fix, including running the tests across a few different AWS
regions. They pass.
I clicked "update" on pkgs.racket-lang.org. But it seems to be slower
than usual to refresh. After it does, you can `raco pkg update aws` to
get the fix.
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Greg Hendershott
w
Greg, hello.
On 2014 Sep 28, at 21:01, Greg Hendershott wrote:
> I logged an issue for this:
>
> https://github.com/greghendershott/aws/issues/32
Ah: I wondered if the problem might be related to that.
> The bug is embarrassing, not just because it's such a silly mistake,
> but it's somethi
Hi, Norman.
I logged an issue for this:
https://github.com/greghendershott/aws/issues/32
I see the problem (or at least the main problem) and will push a fix.
The bug is embarrassing, not just because it's such a silly mistake,
but it's something a unit test could have caught. (I could say th
Matthias & Prabhakar, I think I see what you're saying now. I need the camlp
parser to turn my dialect-expressions into trees. Then I turn my tree into
standard expressions just as one does in Scheme. The only differences is that
in Scheme we have the quote function that skips the parsing st
At http://docs.racket-lang.org/scribble/doc-classes.html I see classes,
interfaces, methods, but don't see fields.
How to document them? Via @defthing or is there some syntax with (get-field ..)
(set-field! ...) template like @defparam ?
--
Roman Klochkov
Racket Users
That is almost surely it, thanks for the second pair of eyes. I had
similar issues with a different type that I thought was a pointer but
was actually a struct, but that one I couldn't even get a single call
to work so it was much more obvious something was up.
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 11:08 AM, Ma
Looking at
http://clang.llvm.org/doxygen/CXString_8h_source.html
it seems that CXString as returned by clang_getCursorSpelling() is not
a pointer:
typedef struct {
const void *data;
unsigned private_flags;
} CXString;
If that's right, I'm a little surprised that `cursor-spelling` wor
On 09/25/2014 05:13 PM, George Neuner wrote:
On 9/25/2014 5:26 PM, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
You can check your IP addr against the list at
"http://gmane.org/denied.php";.
Neil V.
On 9/25/2014 7:08 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
Take a look here:
http://gmane.org/denied.php
My guess is you are the
I'm trying to debug an FFI crash that I'm seeing, and because it is
dealing with C code the error just presents as a segfault. I believe I
have tracked down what is causing the problem, but don't understand
how it could be doing so.
I have two racket functions which take a "cursor" (the foreign
li
No because I want the unit to be a struct that has a dimension field, not a
symbol with various dimensions defined as unions of units.
I want the unit to be based on the dimension, not the other way around, so that
new units can be made that have the same dimension.
I have something like the num
would something like this work?
#lang typed/racket
(struct (U) number+unit ([amount : Real] [unit : U]))
(define-type Weight-Unit (U 'kg 'g 'mg 'μg))
(define-type Weight (number+unit Weight-Unit))
(define-predicate weight? Weight)
(: make-weight : Real Weight-Unit -> Weight)
(de
No, I think we just need to add bounded polymorphism to TR.
Sam
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 12:02 PM, Alexander D. Knauth
wrote:
> Because the struct is representing a unit (kilograms, meters, seconds, etc.),
> and a unit has a dimension (mass, length, time, etc.) and I want the
> type-checker to
Because the struct is representing a unit (kilograms, meters, seconds, etc.),
and a unit has a dimension (mass, length, time, etc.) and I want the
type-checker to be able to know what the dimension of a unit is so that the
types of functions can specify the dimension that something should have.
Why not do this with the type, instead of making this polymorphic?
Sam
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 7:35 PM, Alexander D. Knauth
wrote:
> Is it possible to have a struct that does certain things according to the
> guard?
> #lang typed/racket
>
> (struct (a) foo ([a : a]) #:transparent
> #:guard (la
On 2014-09-28, 12:57 AM, Bill Richter wrote:
I'm making a dialect of HOL Light with different syntax by
interpreting one of my programs as a string and then breaking the
string up into the component pieces, but then I need this
Toploop/exec hack to evaluate my variables. That sounds like the
Sc
Hi all,
The hi-res talk recordings for (fourth RacketCon) are now up on Youtube.
You can watch all of them via this playlist:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXr4KViVC0qI9t3lizitiFJ1cFIeN2Gdh
Let me know if you find any glitches.
Cheers,
Asumu
Racket Users list:
27 matches
Mail list logo
