Re: [racket-users] How to write string-match?

> On Dec 20, 2016, at 3:45 PM, Alexis King wrote: > >> On Dec 20, 2016, at 07:54, Alex Knauth wrote: >> >> Oooh, that's pretty cool. Much better than my super-slow attempt. >> >> Should you make this into a package (I would certainly use it a lot) >> or would it make more sense to add in a pu

Re: [racket-users] Newbie seeking advice

Dangit, where's the 'Like' button on this thing? On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 4:26 PM, Jason Hemann wrote: > > The decision of how to learn, and in what context, is probably more >> important than your choice of language or even your choice of curriculum. >> >> Yours, >> >> Eeyore >> >> (p.s.: but w

Re: [racket-users] Newbie seeking advice

> The decision of how to learn, and in what context, is probably more > important than your choice of language or even your choice of curriculum. > > Yours, > > Eeyore > > (p.s.: but when you do learn, it’s a heck of a lot of fun.) > > I think Eeyore may not be the right person to deliver that pos

Re: [racket-users] How to write string-match?

> On Dec 20, 2016, at 07:54, Alex Knauth wrote: > > Oooh, that's pretty cool. Much better than my super-slow attempt. > > Should you make this into a package (I would certainly use it a lot) > or would it make more sense to add in a pull request to the existing > `match-string` package? I proba

Re: [racket-users] How to write string-match?

Thanks Alexis! That's such an elegant solution. I'm a little in awe of all the pieces that you pulled together to make it work. Fantastic! In terms of surface syntax, I think that your straight extension to match is preferable to what I asked for, allowing this sort of thing (match s [(st

RE: [racket-users] Newbie seeking advice

Yes agreed, HtDP is a very good start too. Nevertheless I like the approach in TLS/TLL for its mathematical approach and giving deep insight in recursion. Jos -Original Message- From: Matthias Felleisen [mailto:matth...@ccs.neu.edu] Sent: martes, 20 de diciembre de 2016 20:00 To: Jos Koo

Re: [racket-users] Newbie seeking advice

I learned programming for fun. I still enjoy it today, but I don't think I would have stuck with it without aspirations of endless tinkering. It is that aspect I seem to enjoy the most. Counterfactual scenarios are too easy to wax philosophical about. I didn't start with any lisp, but I wish I had

Re: [racket-users] Newbie seeking advice

> On Dec 20, 2016, at 2:12 PM, 'John Clements' via Racket Users > wrote: > > Learning to program takes a long time, and is best done with friends. The > decision of how to learn, and in what context, is probably more important > than your choice of language or even your choice of curriculum.

[racket-users] Re: Newbie seeking advice

On Tuesday, December 20, 2016 at 10:47:59 AM UTC+1, steve.lett777 wrote: > I really want to learn programming but I am a slow learner. How do I know if > I can achieve learning programming or not? Am I wasting my time trying? > > And after that one is answered, Which language should I learn progr

[racket-users] Re: REPL output editor speed

On Monday, December 19, 2016 at 10:35:33 AM UTC-5, JCG wrote: > I’m in an situation where Dr. Racket suffices almost perfectly to replace a > Python-based IPython notebook session. The REPL output is graphics and text, > perfect for Dr. Racket. > > A problem is that for all but the smallest o

Re: [racket-users] Newbie seeking advice

> On Dec 20, 2016, at 1:47 AM, steve.lett777 wrote: > > I really want to learn programming but I am a slow learner. How do I know if > I can achieve learning programming or not? Am I wasting my time trying? > > And after that one is answered, Which language should I learn programming in, > Ra

Re: [racket-users] Newbie seeking advice

> On Dec 20, 2016, at 1:53 PM, Jos Koot wrote: > > Hi, > > You already had some very good replies. > If you are very new to programming, I second the advice > to start with Racket and to look into The Little Schemer > (in older days The Little Lisper) > In addition, this mailing list is very fr

RE: [racket-users] Newbie seeking advice

Hi, You already had some very good replies. If you are very new to programming, I second the advice to start with Racket and to look into The Little Schemer (in older days The Little Lisper) In addition, this mailing list is very friendly and can help you with problems you will encounter on your r

Re: [racket-users] Newbie seeking advice

> On Dec 20, 2016, at 12:01 PM, Hendrik Boom wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 01:47:59AM -0800, steve.lett777 wrote: >> I really want to learn programming but I am a slow learner. How do I know if >> I can achieve learning programming or not? Am I wasting my time trying? >> >> And after that

Re: [racket-users] Newbie seeking advice

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 01:47:59AM -0800, steve.lett777 wrote: > I really want to learn programming but I am a slow learner. How do I know if > I can achieve learning programming or not? Am I wasting my time trying? > > And after that one is answered, Which language should I learn programming in,

Re: [racket-users] How to write string-match?

> On Dec 20, 2016, at 4:35 AM, Alexis King wrote: > > One relatively easy solution would be to just compile patterns to > regular expressions and use Racket’s built-in match form. Writing this > as a match-expander is fairly straightforward: > > #lang racket > > (require (for-syntax racket/s

Re: [racket-users] How to write string-match?

> On Dec 20, 2016, at 12:59 AM, Daniel Prager wrote: > > This isn't too bad, but What I'd *really* like is a "string-match" form to > more elegantly process structured data, via a few strings based on a simple > (and greedy) left-to-right algorithm. > > But my macro-fu is too weak. > > 1. Ca

Re: [racket-users] Re: Newbie seeking advice

I definitely recommend Racket. It will let you work in functional, procedural, and object-oriented styles without having to fight against your language / learn a new language full of new syntax/libraries etc. Also, speaking as a professional programmer with *mumble, mumble* years of experience, I

[racket-users] Re: Newbie seeking advice

On Tuesday, December 20, 2016 at 4:47:59 AM UTC-5, steve.lett777 wrote: > I really want to learn programming but I am a slow learner. How do I know if > I can achieve learning programming or not? Am I wasting my time trying? > > And after that one is answered, Which language should I learn progra

Re: [racket-users] How to write string-match?

Excellent idea using a pattern expander. Alexis didn't give an example: > (match "abc--123 foo end" [(str a "--" b " " c " end") (list a b c)]) '("abc" "123" "foo") /Jens Axel 2016-12-20 10:35 GMT+01:00 Alexis King : > One relatively easy solution would be to just compile pat

[racket-users] Newbie seeking advice

I really want to learn programming but I am a slow learner. How do I know if I can achieve learning programming or not? Am I wasting my time trying? And after that one is answered, Which language should I learn programming in, Racket, Scheme, or Python? -- You received this message because you

Re: [racket-users] How to write string-match?

One relatively easy solution would be to just compile patterns to regular expressions and use Racket’s built-in match form. Writing this as a match-expander is fairly straightforward: #lang racket (require (for-syntax racket/string syntax/parse/experimental/template)

[racket-users] How to write string-match?

While working through many of the puzzles in this year's adventofcode.com I tend to parse the input with a sequence of string-splits. This isn't too bad, but What I'd *really* like is a "string-match" form to more elegantly process structured data, via a few strings based on a simple (and greedy)