Matthias,
The DSL text would be of significant interest.
On the subject of texts, I also think a book called "The Jumpy Racketeer"
introducing reified control primitives in the same format as "The Little
Lisper" would receive significant popular interest.
R./
Zack
On Aug 7, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Ga
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Galler wrote:
> Robby,
>
> Thanks for the prompt answer.
>
> I suspected that would be the case.
>
> Is 'Semantics Engineering with PLT Redex' where I should get started on
> language-engineering?
That book does, in a very indirect way, prepare you to answer
quest
Thanks Danny
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Danny Yoo wrote:
;; Question to others: how can this be simplified?
(splicing-let-syntax ([get-literal-metadata
(lambda (stx)
#`(#%datum . #,(format "~s"
I did a slight s
BTW, there's almost never a need to refer to '#%datum'. Just use 'quote'
instead.
Ryan
On 08/07/2012 04:58 PM, Danny Yoo wrote:
;; Question to others: how can this be simplified?
(splicing-let-syntax ([get-literal-metadata
(lambda (stx)
On Aug 7, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Galler wrote:
> Is 'Semantics Engineering with PLT Redex' where I should get started on
> language-engineering?
No, this book is about engineering the mathematical semantics of a language
(existing or to be designed) so that you can test properties (such as
well-d
>;; Question to others: how can this be simplified?
>(splicing-let-syntax ([get-literal-metadata
> (lambda (stx)
> #`(#%datum . #,(format "~s"
I did a slight simplification of the code. I'm putting up the revised
versi
> Is 'Semantics Engineering with PLT Redex' where I should get started on
> language-engineering?
Concretely, I think Robby's suggestion will look something like this:
;;
#lang racket
;; Let's create a custom structure for procedures that remember certain
Robby,
Thanks for the prompt answer.
I suspected that would be the case.
Is 'Semantics Engineering with PLT Redex' where I should get started on
language-engineering?
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 3:22 PM, Robby Findler wrote:
No, but you could define your own language that had its own define
No, but you could define your own language that had its own define
that cooperated with some-useful-... to do that.
You would probably want to do this with a macro, tho, so that you get
the lexical property. I guess.
Robby
On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Galler wrote:
> Is there a function or s
Is there a function or syntax to obtain the module-level binding of a
function?
For example:
(define (my-function)
(display
(some-useful-function-which-captures-name-of-module-level-binding)))
;-> 'my-function
Thanks very much.
R./
Zack
Racket Users list:
http://l
10 matches
Mail list logo
