[racket-users] Rackefest 2021 Amateur Night: Call for participation

2021-03-07 Thread je...@lisp.sh
Friday and Saturday, March 26 & 27, 2021 is the next edition of Racketfest, the little Racket conference that could. On the homepage ( https://racketfest.com) you'll see an impressive lineup of 22 (!) talks from a star-studded array of Racket enthusiasts of all kinds. This year Racketfest goes o

Re: [racket-users] Possible bug when reading/writing large inexact numbers

2021-03-07 Thread Sam Tobin-Hochstadt
I believe it's https://github.com/racket/racket/commit/0561d71e60502fa857b0d169f64da723584d96d6 Sam On Sun, Mar 7, 2021 at 8:52 PM Greg Rosenblatt wrote: > > Great, thanks. Out of curiosity, where in the reader was this bug > originally? Can you point me to a diff? > > On Sunday, March 7, 20

Re: [racket-users] Possible bug when reading/writing large inexact numbers

2021-03-07 Thread Greg Rosenblatt
Great, thanks. Out of curiosity, where in the reader was this bug originally? Can you point me to a diff? On Sunday, March 7, 2021 at 8:42:33 PM UTC-5 sorawe...@gmail.com wrote: > This is already fixed. Racket 8.0 doesn't have this issue. > > On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 8:31 AM Greg Rosenblatt wro

Re: [racket-users] Possible bug when reading/writing large inexact numbers

2021-03-07 Thread Sorawee Porncharoenwase
This is already fixed. Racket 8.0 doesn't have this issue. On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 8:31 AM Greg Rosenblatt wrote: > Large inexact numbers may change values after a second round trip between > read and write. I was expecting to reach a fixed point after the first > round trip. Is this a bug? > >

[racket-users] Possible bug when reading/writing large inexact numbers

2021-03-07 Thread Greg Rosenblatt
Large inexact numbers may change values after a second round trip between read and write. I was expecting to reach a fixed point after the first round trip. Is this a bug? Welcome to Racket v7.8 [cs]. > 4.57030e+53 4.5703e+53 > 4.5703e+53 4.57029995e+53 -- You received this message b

[racket-users] Do I need to explicitly enable readline support for the REPL?

2021-03-07 Thread Tim Lee
When I was using Racket v6, I had to add (require readline/rep) to my ~/.racketrc to enable readline support in the REPL. I have recently upgraded to Racket v7.2 on Ubuntu 20.04. It seems that readline support is automatically enabled even if I remove (require readline/rep) from my ~/.racketrc. Ca

Re: [racket-users] Racket slower than Chez Scheme on interpreter benchmark, potential low hanging fruit?

2021-03-07 Thread Sorawee Porncharoenwase
With the recent improvements by Phil, the rank of the syntax object variant moves up from 26th to the second (what?!?), losing only to c++ / g++. Moreover, it's significantly faster than the third place. On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at 3:29 AM philngu...@gmail.com < philnguyen0...@gmail.com> wrote: > Oh I

[racket-users] Making sequences with missing values

2021-03-07 Thread Raoul Schorer
Hi, I'd like missing values (NAs) *a la R* in sequences, such as a `bit-vector` with a 3rd NA value (therefore taking 2 bits/element and not 1). I'd like that for integers, flonums, etc. too. I'm trying to make a (struct seq/na (mask data)) with prop:sequence, separating the NA mask from the s