As John suggested, the difference is all about how they expand. I
recommend taking a look in the macro stepper to see the details, but
roughly, Typed Racket reasons about control flow in a sequence like
`begin`, but writing `(let () (define x 1) (print x) (define y 2)
(print y))` puts the `(print x
> On Dec 2, 2018, at 2:49 PM, David Storrs wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I have some video (.mp4) and audio (.wav, although it's from Audacity and
> could be exported in other formats) that I would like to sync up. At
> RacketCon I recall seeing Leif running a talk about the Racket Video
> languag
Hi all,
I have some video (.mp4) and audio (.wav, although it's from Audacity and
could be exported in other formats) that I would like to sync up. At
RacketCon I recall seeing Leif running a talk about the Racket Video
language. I'm looking through the docs now and it's unclear to me what the
r
Mostly that it's a function of the context, not the program, whether it is
to be treated as a daemon or not. But there's also a bunch of stuff to do
with whether the process is/should be a session leader or not, which is
again something the program itself shouldn't be making decisions about. djb
wr
LGTM, but I should note that I already accepted Philip’s earlier suggestion. If
you want to make further changes, go for it!
John
> On Nov 30, 2018, at 06:25, Greg Hendershott wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 5:58 AM Robby Findler
> wrote:
>> What about using the function
>>
>> (lambda (x)
I tried to reply to Brian's question earlier but google-groups seems to
have eaten it *eyeroll*. Here's what I wrote:
[In reply to being asked why I think using daemon(3) isn't great]
Mostly that it's a function of the context, not the program, whether it is
to be treated as a daemon or not. But t
6 matches
Mail list logo
