Physics engines are cool!
...which is why I'm super excited about the fact that there are (or were)
bindings for the Chipmunk physics library.
The only issues are:
1) I can't get it to work,
2) I don't know a lot about C,
3) I don't know a lot about Racket's FFI.
I've posted an issue on the
On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 2:18 PM, Alexis King wrote:
> I think the answer here really is “don’t use `contract` directly”. The
> actual implementation of the contract system does some fancy rebinding
> of my-func when you use define/contract, turning this:
>
>(define/contract x ctc rhs)
>
> int
Good call, I'll be careful about that in future examples.
David Storrs writes:
> This is a very cool thing, but may I suggest choosing a different name than
> 'can'? '(can-unseal lunch)' reads less like a verb and more like a
> predicate where someone forgot the '?' -- "Are you able to unseal lu
I think the answer here really is “don’t use `contract` directly”. The
actual implementation of the contract system does some fancy rebinding
of my-func when you use define/contract, turning this:
(define/contract x ctc rhs)
into this:
(define x-awaiting-neg
(let ([tmp rhs])
(l
Matthias Felleisen writes:
>> On Sep 10, 2018, at 10:09 AM, Christopher Lemmer Webber
>> wrote:
>>
>> Jack Firth writes:
>>
>>> If I make a symbol with `gensym` (or do anything else that creates a new
>>> value that's not `eq?` to any other value) in some module, what are the
>>> absolute upper
(define (my-func thunk-arg)
(contract integer? (thunk-arg) 'my-func ))
What should I replace with?
NB: I know that in the example I could do
(define/contract (my-func thunk-arg) (-> (-> integer?) integer?)
(thunk-arg))
but I'm looking for an answer to the generic case.
--
You receiv
This is a very cool thing, but may I suggest choosing a different name than
'can'? '(can-unseal lunch)' reads less like a verb and more like a
predicate where someone forgot the '?' -- "Are you able to unseal lunch?"
as opposed to "Unseal my lunch now".
On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 11:09 AM, Christoph
> On Sep 10, 2018, at 10:09 AM, Christopher Lemmer Webber
> wrote:
>
> Jack Firth writes:
>
>> If I make a symbol with `gensym` (or do anything else that creates a new
>> value that's not `eq?` to any other value) in some module, what are the
>> absolute upper limits on my ability to use t
Jack Firth writes:
> If I make a symbol with `gensym` (or do anything else that creates a new
> value that's not `eq?` to any other value) in some module, what are the
> absolute upper limits on my ability to use that symbol within the module
> without allowing any other modules to get ahold of th
You might be interested in the tests in the `gui-test` package, here:
https://github.com/racket/gui/tree/master/gui-test/tests/gracket --
maybe start with `windowing.rktl`.
Sam
On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 9:19 AM Cam wrote:
>
>
> I am developing a small GUI application using
> https://docs.racket-lan
I am developing a small GUI application using
https://docs.racket-lang.org/gui/. I've got good test coverage for the
layers beneath the GUI but I was wondering if there were any good
options already available for automating regression-style testing of the
GUI itself. Any wisdom or recommendations
11 matches
Mail list logo
