Re: [racket-users] planet questions

Looking at http://pkgs.racket-lang.org/#%28author:anu...@mendhekar.com%29 , It looks like the package catalog (not planet) found the docs, but it can't build them because it can't find libWN.so I know nothing about that, so someone else

Re: [racket-users] Standardizing the threading macro and organizing packages

To clarify this, I think the function version is better because it's more powerful and more general, not just because it's convenient. A macro constrains you to the syntax, but a function can be used in many different ways. Similarly for the macro, allowing the user to specify the identifier to

Re: [racket-users] Standardizing the threading macro and organizing packages

> If this isn't going to be added to the core (and I don't think it should), > then there would need to be some work done on exposure and making sure > everyone who wants this functionality knows "look here first and only roll > your own if this isn't specific enough”. This is a good point, and

[racket-users] Re: Standardizing the threading macro and organizing packages

> On Oct 8, 2015, at 12:02 AM, Jack Firth wrote: > As for the actual package, I'm a strong proponent of a non-macro version > that's just the reverse of compose, mostly because it plays very nicely with > anonymous macro functions like fancy-app. I'm a bit biased as that's the one > I made in

Re: [racket-users] fail on http server response not actually a failure?

> On Oct 6, 2015, at 6:58 AM, Jay McCarthy wrote: > > I'm not sure if this answers the question... > > These errors are coming from the Web server response-outputing code > failing when the other side closed the connection early. The exception > would not be returned to your code, because your

[racket-users] Re: Standardizing the threading macro and organizing packages

I definitely like standard packages, but how will we avoid the problem of this becoming just another threading macro package instead of an actual standard? I also feel like something similar would be useful for anonymous functions, what with curly-fn, rackjure, fancy-app, the cut and cute macros

Re: [racket-users] Standardizing the threading macro and organizing packages

A few thoughts: 1. This is a great idea -- one of the reasons that I think Racket has avoided lots of little dialects despite syntactic flexibility is standardizing the community on one thing. I'm glad you're continuing this. 2. When we've standardized on this sort of thing in the core, the prima

[racket-users] Standardizing the threading macro and organizing packages

While in St. Louis, I had a brief conversation with Jay, Alex, and Jack about how we all happen to have our own implementation of Clojure’s threading macro. That macro is called -> in Clojure, but I believe Greg’s rackjure library set the Racket standard of calling it ~>, since the arrow is alre

[racket-users] planet questions

Having just submitted my first contribution to Planet, I am struggling with a couple of things: 1. My module is an FFI which requires a specific library. Quite obviously, the building daemon fails (because it doesn't have this library). But, it seems like this a mischaracterization of the packa

Re: [racket-users] package-build status for upcoming release

On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 12:18:32 -0500, Vincent St-Amour wrote: > > honu > > I'll push a fix. I'm confused. I can't reproduce the problem with a fresh honu install. There is no require for `unstable/syntax` anywhere in the repo. Any ideas? Vincent -- You received this message because you are sub

Re: [racket-users] package-build status for upcoming release

command-line-ext is indeed failing because of mischief, and I removed that dependency the other day. jack-mock is failing due to attempting to require `unstable/sequence`, I don't remember offhand which package that's in now. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

Re: [racket-users] package-build status for upcoming release

Fixed mine, thanks. Jay On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 1:18 PM, Vincent St-Amour wrote: > On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 10:16:51 -0500, > Matthew Flatt wrote: >> Failure likely due to new exports from existing modules: >> >> command-line-ext > > This one is due to mischief. I believe Jack is working on removing

RE: [racket-users] (atanh -2) -> +nan.0

#lang racket (require math/base) (define-syntax-rule (tst x ...) (begin (let ((y (string->number 'x))) (printf "~a ~s ~s ~s~n" 'x y (atanh y) (real? y))) ...)) (tst "-2" "-2+0i" "-2+0.0i" "-2.0" "-2.0+0i" "-2.0+0.0i") Produces -2 -2 +nan.0 #t -2+0i -2 +nan.0 #t -2+0.0i -2.0+0.0i -0.54

Re: [racket-users] package-build status for upcoming release

On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 10:16:51 -0500, Matthew Flatt wrote: > Failure likely due to new exports from existing modules: > > command-line-ext This one is due to mischief. I believe Jack is working on removing the mischief dependency. > drbayes I'll send a pull request. > measures-with-dimensions

Re: [racket-users] call-as-atomic and garbage collection

At Wed, 7 Oct 2015 08:40:12 +0200, Berthold Bäuml wrote: > does call-as-atomic block garbage collection? No. > I want to call a C function from > Racket which takes a pointer to a struct as an argument. The struct consists > of a mixture of atomic and pointer fields and one of the pointers sh

[racket-users] package-build status for upcoming release

I've run a package build with a recent snapshot: http://next-pkg-build.racket-lang.org.s3-website-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/ I haven't investigated all of the problems in detail, but here's what it looks like so far: * About five packages still fail due to the incompatible macro-system change

Re: [racket-users] (atanh -2) -> +nan.0

They are the same number, no? -> (= (make-rectangular -2 0) -2) #t -> (complex? -2) #t Robby On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Tony Garnock-Jones wrote: > On 10/07/2015 10:19 AM, Brian Adkins wrote: >> If I instead call: (atanh (number->float-complex -2)) I do get a >> complex result. > > I wa

Re: [racket-users] (atanh -2) -> +nan.0

On 10/07/2015 10:19 AM, Brian Adkins wrote: > If I instead call: (atanh (number->float-complex -2)) I do get a > complex result. I was surprised to see that (atanh (make-rectangular -2 0)) => +nan.0. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" gr

[racket-users] (atanh -2) -> +nan.0

Someone tweeted about The Evolution of Lisp: http://www.csee.umbc.edu/courses/331/resources/papers/Evolution-of-Lisp.pdf As I was reading through it, I came across (p. 52) Steele's "acceptance test". I was curious how Racket might handle it, so I tried the factorial example, which passed, and t