On Wednesday, November 24, 2010, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> Racket has a handsome set of books.
You are right, but I bet you couldn't get a librarian or bookseller to
find you a book on Racket.
Of course there is already a book in the within the guide sections of
the Racket documentation that is at
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> through HtDP, is about ten copies. Even if we view writing the book as an
> investment in the platform, then the question is whether the platform would
> be better served by expending the same effort on PLaneT packages instead.
$0.02 my cur
Racket has a handsome set of books.
I have two general ideas for complementary Racket books that I could
write. But, at the moment, I would guess that the market for a
complementary programming book, if we exclude the people who are better
off working through HtDP, is about ten copies. Even
Nevermind let/lambda, *when is the programming in *Racket* book coming?*
All good PL's have a book don't they?
Stephen
--
Stephen De Gabrielle
stephen.degabrie...@acm.org
Telephone +44 (0)20 85670911
Mobile+44 (0)79 85189045
http://www.degabrielle.name/stephen
___
An hour ago, Philippe Meunier wrote:
> Eli Barzilay wrote:
> >It's more than that -- the "theoretically advanced ... but" that he
> >uses shows off that he really considers the CL macros to be more
> >advanced.
>
> That's because he apparently only knows about syntax-rule and not
> syntax-case. [
Eli Barzilay wrote:
>It's more than that -- the "theoretically advanced ... but" that he
>uses shows off that he really considers the CL macros to be more
>advanced.
That's because he apparently only knows about syntax-rule and not
syntax-case. Look for the word "hygienic" in chapter 3 of his boo
Three minutes ago, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:
> Sadly, his response only makes things worse. He writes
>
> Some Scheme systems have theoretically advanced macro systems but
> I believe the Common Lisp macro system is more suitable for
> writing useful macros.
>
> Eh? How about a huge ch
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Shriram Krishnamurthi
wrote:
> Sadly, his response only makes things worse. He writes
>
> Some Scheme systems have theoretically advanced macro systems but I
> believe the Common Lisp macro system is more suitable for writing
> useful macros.
>
> Eh? How abou
Sadly, his response only makes things worse. He writes
Some Scheme systems have theoretically advanced macro systems but I
believe the Common Lisp macro system is more suitable for writing
useful macros.
Eh? How about a huge chunk of the cool things in Racket, from the
class system to Typ
Thanks for posting that.
Robby
On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Ciprian Dorin, Craciun
wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 18:14, Matthias Felleisen
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> If these two paragraphs are characteristic for the book, it is based on the
>> usual misconceptions of poor Common Lispers about
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 18:14, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
>
> If these two paragraphs are characteristic for the book, it is based on the
> usual misconceptions of poor Common Lispers about the world of hygienic
> macros, which they have never understood and are therefore afraid of.
>
> For us,
An hour and a half ago, Greg Hendershott wrote:
>
> Anaphoric macros are deliberately unhygienic.
Not necessarily -- see syntax parameters. The idea is that there is
an identifier (like `it') which is managed like all other identifers,
and it has some use only inside some lexical context (like t
And, now that we're being careful with our words, I should have said
"most macros I have written work well in a hygenic macro system".
Robby
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 9:08 PM, Shriram Krishnamurthi
wrote:
> In particular, something many people miss -- because of the way
> hygiene is presented --
In particular, something many people miss -- because of the way
hygiene is presented -- is that a hygienic macro system must have a
deep understanding of the underlying language, at least up to the
level of the binding structure of its constructs. That is how it can
even be sure what is a binding,
On Nov 20, 2010, at 9:01 PM, Greg Hendershott wrote:
> But I didn't get the
> impression that all or even most of the macro techniques were
> unhygienic.
Hygiene is a technical term. The idea is roughly that
the __macro system__ (as a whole) should respect the
lexical structure of your progr
For my part, I don't mind dissing hygiene; I certainly don't think
that the current state of the art in hygenic macro expanders is the
best we can do. BUT, I found the small sampling that I read of Let
Over Lambda to be fairly ignorant in some ways and quite strange in
others (like the paragraph th
I've only skimmed/sampled some of On Lisp, and even less of Let Over
Lambda. But the main theme of both seemed to be: Macros are an
important higher level of programming, but under-appreciated,
under-utilized, under-understood (stood?), and "under-booked". Hence
these books.
Anaphoric macros are d
7 hours ago, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
> For us, we should figure out what's good about the book and use it
> for our own work. We understand 'hygienic macros' and these guys'
> world. Advantage, us.
>
> The author is irrelevant to us.
I've ran into this book a while ago -- it's just an overa
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 1:25 PM, Jos Koot wrote:
> I have misused datum->syntax a couple of times, just to find out later that I
> did not need it realy (although I
> recognize that in some cases it may be usefull)
I continue to be delighted when I find that syntax-rules often
provides an easily
On Nov 20, 2010, at 12:25 PM, Jos Koot wrote:
> Having read some of the stuff, l am not impressed. Yes, in some cases we may
> want to introduce a binding not named in a macro call. Racket and R6RS
> (macro-case) do that very well. That for a beginner it is difficult to
> prepare unhegienic macro
mber 2010 17:08
> To: Robby Findler
> Cc: Carl Eastlund; users@racket-lang.org
> Subject: Re: [racket] letoverlambda
>
>
> On Nov 20, 2010, at 11:03 AM, Robby Findler wrote:
>
> > Good thing we're not Scheme anymore
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Matthias Felleisen
wrote:
>
>
> If these two paragraphs are characteristic for the book, it is based on the
> usual misconceptions of poor Common Lispers about the world of hygienic
> macros, which they have never understood and are therefore afraid of.
And boo
If these two paragraphs are characteristic for the book, it is based on the
usual misconceptions of poor Common Lispers about the world of hygienic macros,
which they have never understood and are therefore afraid of.
For us, we should figure out what's good about the book and use it for our
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 10:07 AM, Matthias Felleisen
wrote:
>
> On Nov 20, 2010, at 11:03 AM, Robby Findler wrote:
>
>> Good thing we're not Scheme anymore.
>
> :-) You think that guy would believe you?
I only read two paragraphs of his masterpiece so perhaps I am
misjudging him, but I'm not incl
On Nov 20, 2010, at 11:03 AM, Robby Findler wrote:
> Good thing we're not Scheme anymore.
:-) You think that guy would believe you?
_
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Carl Eastlund wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 9:46 AM, Hendrik Boom wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 08:42:57AM -0500, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:
>>> I haven't seen this book mentioned here before, so:
>>>
>>> http://letoverlambda.com/
>>>
>>> It is, well, a v
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 9:46 AM, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 08:42:57AM -0500, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:
>> I haven't seen this book mentioned here before, so:
>>
>> http://letoverlambda.com/
>>
>> It is, well, a very particular perspective on things, but I've heard
>> people
On Sat, Nov 20, 2010 at 08:42:57AM -0500, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:
> I haven't seen this book mentioned here before, so:
>
> http://letoverlambda.com/
>
> It is, well, a very particular perspective on things, but I've heard
> people speak well of it.
It looks interesting. Very unSchemeish,
I haven't seen this book mentioned here before, so:
http://letoverlambda.com/
It is, well, a very particular perspective on things, but I've heard
people speak well of it.
Shriram
_
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://lists.racket-lan
29 matches
Mail list logo
