oh if you dont like adding 0.
maybe you can use the keyword #:final instead of #:break
(they say it does just one more iteration before breaking the loop)
On Wednesday, 14 October 2015 05:53:03 UTC+2, Linh Chi Nguyen wrote:
> Isnt this the reason we should add 0 at the beginning of the list?
>
Isnt this the reason we should add 0 at the beginning of the list?
On 13/ott/2015, at 22:38, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
> Welcome to Racket v6.3.0.1.
>> (define r .8)
>> (for/last ([p '(a b c d)][f '(.2 .5 .7 1)] #:break (< r f)) p)
> 'c
>
> Or WORSE:
>
>> (define r (random))
>> r
> 0.01110
> I just never found any good docs on how to do that. Near as I can tell,
runtime linking of a unit is even MORE verbose and persnickety than just
> manually typing in all the procedures you want to pass to a callback
Some of the verbosity of units can be reduced using the "inference"
features t
On Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 11:40:12 PM UTC, Alexis King wrote:
> units
Oh uh, conceivably you could have "code" that provided a live session object on
linking, and handled session refreshing internally, then just link that with
units that have session dependant code. I just never found any
I usually prefer to do something like for the `roomba` object in
"http://www.neilvandyke.org/racket-roomba/";.
See how there's a `current-roomba` Racket parameter, which provides a
default value for the `#:roomba` optional argument for each procedure.
So, users of the code can pass around the
On Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 11:40:12 PM UTC, Alexis King wrote:
> Have you taken a look at parameters?
Short answer: yes. Long answer: they're convenient thread-local globals, but
still feel like globals to me.
(define a (make-parameter 0))
(define (called-at-hopefully-regular-intervals)
(
Have you taken a look at parameters?
http://docs.racket-lang.org/guide/parameterize.html
http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/parameters.html
There is also a way to “link units at runtime”, conveniently called “units”.
http://docs.racket-lang.org/guide/units.html?q=unites#%28tech._unit%29
http:
How do you deal with long-term state that your programming logic depends on,
but is only available at run-time? A persistent connection to a database, or an
RPC server for instance, or a logged in user account. Do you use parameters?
Session objects? Just raw globals? Or something stranger?
Thi
On Tuesday, October 13, 2015 at 9:21:08 PM UTC+2, William Hatch wrote:
> I would like to see it fall back on HTTP_PROXY if PLT_HTTP_PROXY is not found.
+1
> It is annoying that the cases vary (eg. wget uses http_proxy and https_proxy,
> curl uses http_proxy and HTTPS_PROXY), but maybe we could pr
:( . I tried few modifications, but I didn't get any improvement. I
think that the recalculation of the population is used very seldom, so
any change there will not affect the speed too much.
Most of the time is used in the matches, but I don't have any
suggestion for it (that doesn't include ugli
Welcome to Racket v6.3.0.1.
> (define r .8)
> (for/last ([p '(a b c d)][f '(.2 .5 .7 1)] #:break (< r f)) p)
'c
Or WORSE:
> (define r (random))
> r
0.011105628290672482
> (for/last ([p '(a b c d)][f '(.2 .5 .7 1)] #:break (< r f)) p)
#f
On Oct 13, 2015, at 3:37 PM, Nguyen Linh Chi wrote:
the list 0 isnt a bug. I add it because #:break will break the fitness vector
at r < f.
For example,
Population : a b c d
Cumulative fitness .2 .5 .7 1
If the random r = .8, it means that the lottery points to the interval of
automaton d. But #:break will breaks at .7, and the associated autom
I would like to see it fall back on HTTP_PROXY if PLT_HTTP_PROXY is not
found. It is annoying that the cases vary (eg. wget uses http_proxy and
https_proxy, curl uses http_proxy and HTTPS_PROXY), but maybe we could
prefer the one in all caps and fall back on lowercase. My last job was
behind a pr
Hi Mathias, thank you so much for helping me a lot.
You can use the code as you want, i still have tons of them on my github. (Just
dont use it against me ok :D )
I'd try to see through your list of suggestions.
About the automata payoff.
There are 2 different things that are always mixed up: r
p.s. One more question. Why do you 'reset' the payoff for automata after each
round? Shouldn't they carry along their overall, historical payoff?
On Oct 13, 2015, at 1:40 PM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
> 1. Your code is a good example for something that we could use as a
> benchmark, an
See repo. I special-purposed shuffle for my data rep.
On Oct 13, 2015, at 12:39 PM, Alex Knauth wrote:
> I've started on that, but shuffle doesn't exist properly yet for generic
> collections. I could just use (shuffle (sequence->list )), but, what
> would be the best way of representin
1. Your code is a good example for something that we could use as a benchmark,
and working on it has helped me find a couple of problems in drracket and typed
racket. Thanks for triggering my activity. I'll stop soon.
2. I figured out that your code was general so you could accommodate more
s
2015-10-13 19:16 GMT+02:00 Matthew Flatt :
> At Tue, 13 Oct 2015 19:10:54 +0200, Jens Axel Søgaard wrote:
> > I think I get it - if sort is a macro.
>
> The `define` form that supports keyword arguments can expand to a macro
> definition. As an example, try the macro stepper on
>
> #lang racke
At Tue, 13 Oct 2015 19:10:54 +0200, Jens Axel Søgaard wrote:
> 2015-10-12 14:48 GMT+02:00 Matthew Flatt :
>
> > At Mon, 12 Oct 2015 13:23:48 +0200, Jens Axel Søgaard wrote:
> > > In DrRacket with just #lang racket in the definitions window.
> > > Click Run.
> > >
> > > Welcome to DrRacket, ver
2015-10-12 14:48 GMT+02:00 Matthew Flatt :
> At Mon, 12 Oct 2015 13:23:48 +0200, Jens Axel Søgaard wrote:
> > In DrRacket with just #lang racket in the definitions window.
> > Click Run.
> >
> > Welcome to DrRacket, version 6.3.0.1--2015-10-12(a683542/a) [3m].
> > Language: racket; memory
I've started on that, but shuffle doesn't exist properly yet for generic
collections. I could just use (shuffle (sequence->list )), but, what would
be the best way of representing this? Generic collections give you the freedom
of creating a new type of data structure just for shuffled sequen
>
> - why you use [i (in-range 10)] in all for loop? what's the difference
> with [i 10]. they both produce stream, right?
Yes, but `in-range` runs faster because of "types". Here's a little example:
#lang racket/base
(define N (expt 10 7))
(time (for ([n (in-range N)]) (void)))
;; cpu time: 3
Matthias you work like a machine, too fast.
Anyway, I have no idea what is type or not type.
But I have some general remarks:
1. A general automaton can have many states, say, 10 states.
so the action in each state can be either cooperate or defect (this is a
deterministic automaton, for a pro
On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 09:08:45AM -0500, Robby Findler wrote:
> That will work for newly typed text. Other code might changed the style and
> copying and pasting styled text may change it. You can use after-insert to
> change the style for those cases. Or maybe you want to allow that.
OK thanks.
24 matches
Mail list logo
