Preface:
There have been a number of times that I've seen something in the
documentation that I would like to suggest an improvement to -- the
occasional typo, an idea for a clarifying example, etc.
Unfortunately, finding specific parts of the documentation in git
feels extremely difficult. There
Thanks Matthias, that makes sense.
On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 8:50 PM Matthias Felleisen
wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 12, 2019, at 5:28 PM, David Storrs wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 5:03 PM wrote:
>
> This is nice for defining abstract types, but it can be pretty
> inconvenien
> On Feb 12, 2019, at 5:28 PM, David Storrs wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 5:03 PM wrote:
This is nice for defining abstract types, but it can be pretty
inconvenient for defining plain old aggregated data types that just have a
bundle of fields. When defining those
Hi!
I seem to have some weird behavior with syntax coloring a #lang. Sometimes
it seems to think particular words that are normally correctly colored are
errors.
For example, if I'm starting to type a keyword, it's coloring it red (which
it should), but when I complete the word, it doesn't re-col
The only thing I can suggest than is to try to debug the problem.
I would first try to use procmon from the sysinternals suite to determine
what API calls are made when the library is loaded into Racket, which one
returns an error and what are the parameters to that call. I would also
use depe
On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 5:03 PM wrote:
>>>
>>> This is nice for defining abstract types, but it can be pretty inconvenient
>>> for defining plain old aggregated data types that just have a bundle of
>>> fields. When defining those types as structs, consider using the
>>> #:transparent option. T
On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 3:55 PM David Storrs wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 4:46 PM wrote:
> >>
> >> Thank you for the explanation. Can I ask why the heck it works this
> >> way? This seems to be explicitly designed for maximal surprise and
> >> minimal usefulness.
> >
> >
> > It works that
>
> This is nice for defining abstract types, but it can be pretty
>> inconvenient for defining plain old aggregated data types that just have a
>> bundle of fields. When defining those types as structs, consider using the
>> #:transparent option. This means "use no inspector at all" (roughly)
On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 4:46 PM wrote:
>>
>> Thank you for the explanation. Can I ask why the heck it works this
>> way? This seems to be explicitly designed for maximal surprise and
>> minimal usefulness.
>
>
> It works that way so that, by default, modules can't inspect, modify, or
> otherwis
>
> Thank you for the explanation. Can I ask why the heck it works this
> way? This seems to be explicitly designed for maximal surprise and
> minimal usefulness.
>
It works that way so that, by default, modules can't inspect, modify, or
otherwise muck around with structs defined by other m
Good point; I should have said "built-in".
On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 12:54 PM Matthias Felleisen
wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 12, 2019, at 12:48 PM, David Storrs wrote:
> >
> > That's impressive and yes, you're right that it works. The problem is
> > that it is something non-standard, a user extension
On February 12, 2019 6:48:49 PM GMT+01:00, David Storrs
wrote:
>Actually, that raises a question: Does Racket use the pcre library or
>does it reinvent the wheel? If it uses pcre then why not make all the
>features available?
My goodness. Perl isn't the One True Way of regular expressions,
On 2/12/2019 11:44 AM, Jens Axel Søgaard wrote:
FWIW here is the readme describing how to build libraries for Windows:
https://github.com/racket/racket/tree/master/racket/src/native-libs
That is a guide useful in general, but it doesn't answer my question to
Philip. Plain C DLLs are (for t
> On Feb 12, 2019, at 12:48 PM, David Storrs wrote:
>
> That's impressive and yes, you're right that it works. The problem is
> that it is something non-standard, a user extension that the
> programmer needs to know about, ensure is installed, and require.
> Perl, Python, and the pcre library
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 7:08 PM Philip McGrath wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 2:32 PM David Storrs wrote:
>>
>> It would be great if Perl's / pcre's "x" mode could be pulled into
>> Racket, ideally with modifiers on the end of the regexp instead of
>> inside it. This mode specifies that all
This is perfect! Thanks — Matthias
> On Feb 11, 2019, at 11:04 PM, Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠) wrote:
>
> For anyone creating such a web page for Python to Racket specifically,
> there is probably a great deal of inspiration, and reminders of
> stumbling blocks, to be found in Arne Babenhauserheide'
On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 11:43 AM Shu-Hung You
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 10:04 AM David Storrs wrote:
> >
> > Could someone point me to the FM on how to properly use struct-info?
> > For the life of me, I cannot get anything except (values #f #t) out of
> > it. I see that:
> >
> > 1) str
FWIW here is the readme describing how to build libraries for Windows:
https://github.com/racket/racket/tree/master/racket/src/native-libs
Den tir. 12. feb. 2019 kl. 17.37 skrev George Neuner :
> Hi Philip,
>
> On 2/12/2019 1:18 AM, Philip McGrath wrote:
>
> I'm encountering an issue using `ffi-
On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 10:04 AM David Storrs wrote:
>
> Could someone point me to the FM on how to properly use struct-info?
> For the life of me, I cannot get anything except (values #f #t) out of
> it. I see that:
>
> 1) struct-info only works with struct types that are under the control
> of
Hi Philip,
On 2/12/2019 1:18 AM, Philip McGrath wrote:
I'm encountering an issue using `ffi-lib` to load a DLL on Windows.
The problem appears to be specific to Racket, as I seem to be able to
load the same DLL from Python.
Specifically, I'm trying to build platform-specific packages for
lib
Could someone point me to the FM on how to properly use struct-info?
For the life of me, I cannot get anything except (values #f #t) out of
it. I see that:
1) struct-info only works with struct types that are under the control
of the current inspector.
2) You can provide an inspector to a struct
Awesome, thanks!
On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 10:49 AM Jay McCarthy wrote:
>
> There was an internal error, but it is fixed now. Thanks!
>
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 5:37 PM David Storrs wrote:
> >
> > I've pushed some enhancements to the struct-plus-plus package but the
> > package server is not pick
There was an internal error, but it is fixed now. Thanks!
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 5:37 PM David Storrs wrote:
>
> I've pushed some enhancements to the struct-plus-plus package but the
> package server is not picking them up. I've updated the version
> number in info.rkt and I've done "Rescan all
As far as I can tell, yes. I've confirmed that the install script is
getting Racket from
https://mirror.racket-lang.org/installers/7.2/racket-7.2-x86_64-win32.exe
-Philip
On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 2:01 AM Alex Harsanyi
wrote:
> Do you have x64 Racket installed? This is an error that usually come
BOB 2019 makes for a great combo with Racketfest, with lots of Racket
and FP content!
BOB 2019
Conference
“What happens if we simply use what
25 matches
Mail list logo
