Racket version 6.2 is now available from
http://racket-lang.org/
With this release we are taking a major step forward to get our user
community even more involved than in the past. Over the past six months,
we have re-organized the Racket code base into a small core code repo
and many other
For changes like typoes, Github has a "pencil" button at the top of its
source view that simplifies the pull-request process.
https://help.github.com/articles/editing-files-in-another-user-s-repository/
Vincent
At Thu, 18 Jun 2015 21:44:50 -0400,
Alexander D. Knauth wrote:
>
>
> You could pr
I was intending for that example to have the variables be defined outside the
macro, but being able to create the (set! ...) forms outside should mean I
could also hypothetically create let/define-values forms. This is why I
originally specified being able to effect generation of both prologue +
Are the x, y, and z variables meant to be defined outside the macro by the user
as in:
(let ([x “something”] [y “something else”] [z “and something else”])
(Loop ….))
?
Or should the Loop macro create a (let ([x 0] [y 0] [z 0]) ….) for you instead?
On Jun 19, 2015, at 5:58 PM, Thomas Dickerson
Sure, here's a toy example.
This code:
> (Loop 10
> (begin
> (define-values
> [dx dy dz]
> (values 0 0 0))
> ; Some calculation here
> (Accum x dx)
> (Accum y dy)
> (Accum z dz)))
>
Should desugar into this code:
> (letrec
>
My 1000 numbers were so small that they weren't reliable.
Change the `num-runs-per-f` and experiment yourself, if you'd like.
The code is attached.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receivin
Hi Luke,
What are the result on lists of length 1000?
Also can you post the benchmarking code?
/Jens Axel
2015-06-19 22:33 GMT+02:00 Luke Miles :
> I timed all these with `sqr` on a list of 1 `(random)`.
>
> Luke's (my) first one:
> cpu time: 4706 real time: 4699 gc time: 3673
>
> Luke's
I timed all these with `sqr` on a list of 1 `(random)`.
Luke's (my) first one:
cpu time: 4706 real time: 4699 gc time: 3673
Luke's second one:
cpu time: 5401 real time: 5393 gc time: 4136
Jon's first one:
cpu time: 9734 real time: 9728 gc time: 8007
Jon's second one (tested on a vector of c
A more efficient version using append-reverse from srfi/1.
#lang racket
(require (only-in srfi/1 append-reverse))
(define (list-splits xs)
(define (loop ys zs) ; xs = (append (reverse ys) yz)
(match zs
['() '()]
[(cons z zs*) (cons (list ys zs)
On 19/06/2015 21:24, Luke Miles wrote:
Say I have a list ls and I want to produce a list of
lists where the i'th list has the i'th element of ls tripled,
but all other elements are the same.
e.g. '(3 5 7) => '((9 5 7) (3 15 7) (3 5 21))
What is a fast way to do this?
I could do a loop with
Hello,
Use (define-values (a b c) (http-send-recv ...)) as a remplacement for define
when you receive multiple values.
Or (let-values ([(a b c) (http-send-recv ...)]) ...) the same idea but for let.
You can search for binding ending with '-values'.
see
http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/eva
#lang racket
(define (list-splits xs)
(define (loop ys zs) ; xs = (append (reverse ys) yz)
(match zs
['() '()]
[(cons z zs*) (cons (list ys zs)
(loop (cons z ys) zs*))]))
(loop '() xs))
(define (map-once f xs)
(for/list ([ys+zs (list-split
It's unlikely that an implementation using continuations would be
faster than one that does not.
An idiomatic solution might look like:
(define (map-once fn xs)
(for/list ([i (in-range (length xs))])
(for/list ([(x j) (in-indexed (in-list xs))])
(cond [(= i j) (fn x)]
[els
While Racket enables the construction of new frameworks and languages,
indeed encourages it, I think rackunit has proven its value and many of
us use it as a de factor standard. (Some also use Eli's test library,
because they enjoy the simpler syntax. But it's not quite ready and
I am ambiguous
Hi Jay,
Sorry for this newbie question, but how do I grab just the third value.
Everything I try gets me an arity mismatch:
result arity mismatch;
expected number of values not received
expected: 1
received: 3
values...:
#"HTTP/1.1 200 OK"
'(#"Cache-Control: no-store, no-cache, must
On Friday, June 19, 2015, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> Is `rackunit` to be used for all core Racket testing, long-term?
>
>
Racketeers can use whatever they feel like imho.
> Is there any other Racket testing stuff on the horizon?
>
>
Not to my knowledge.
Jay
> (Reason for asking: I'm about to sta
Say I have a list ls and I want to produce a list of
lists where the i'th list has the i'th element of ls tripled,
but all other elements are the same.
e.g. '(3 5 7) => '((9 5 7) (3 15 7) (3 5 21))
What is a fast way to do this?
I could do a loop with appending.
(define (map-once f ls)
(let M
On 06/19/2015 03:07 PM, Thomas Dickerson wrote:
Hi All,
I'm trying to figure out how best to implement the following pattern of macro
behavior:
Let's say we are writing Loop macro that implements a looped computation over a
specified body. I would like to then be able to
(a) introduce additio
Hi All,
I'm trying to figure out how best to implement the following pattern of macro
behavior:
Let's say we are writing Loop macro that implements a looped computation over a
specified body. I would like to then be able to
(a) introduce additional Loop-specific macros that are defined only wit
Is `rackunit` to be used for all core Racket testing, long-term?
Is there any other Racket testing stuff on the horizon?
(Reason for asking: I'm about to standardize unit/regression testing for
a large Racket-based system. I need to decide whether to build it upon
`rackunit` at some level.)
20 matches
Mail list logo
