It turns out that I can just do:
(define-syntax (new-lambda stx)
(syntax-parse stx
[(_ (parameter:id) body:expr)
#'(lambda-structure 'parameter
body
(lambda (parameter)
body))]))
because my lambda-calculus l
This is totally different technology. See
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/racket/pubs/#esop2001-cff
> On May 28, 2017, at 11:17 PM, Vityou wrote:
>
> I just noticed that the stepper for intermediate student with lambda pretty
> much does what I want. I guess I can look into that.
>
> On Sunday, May
I just noticed that the stepper for intermediate student with lambda pretty
much does what I want. I guess I can look into that.
On Sunday, May 28, 2017 at 7:55:08 PM UTC-6, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
> I misunderstood because of your mismatched parentheses. Without eval, you
> can’t do better t
I misunderstood because of your mismatched parentheses. Without eval, you can’t
do better than that. Parens rock.
> On May 28, 2017, at 9:51 PM, Vityou wrote:
>
> On Sunday, May 28, 2017 at 2:01:09 PM UTC-6, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>> You need to apply the function, not just compute the su
On Sunday, May 28, 2017 at 2:01:09 PM UTC-6, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
> You need to apply the function, not just compute the substitution. See
> applicable struct in previous message. This should just work out, w/o much
> ado.
>
>
>
> > On May 28, 2017, at 12:40 AM, Vityou wrote:
> >
> > O
You need to apply the function, not just compute the substitution. See
applicable struct in previous message. This should just work out, w/o much ado.
> On May 28, 2017, at 12:40 AM, Vityou wrote:
>
> On Thursday, May 25, 2017 at 5:50:29 PM UTC-6, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>> The client mod
On Thursday, May 25, 2017 at 5:50:29 PM UTC-6, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
> The client module can refer to all imported #% forms. If you don’t export it
> from the language module, it’s not there. [Well, mostly] Implicitly the
> client module already refers to #% forms already.
>
>
>
> > On Ma
The client module can refer to all imported #% forms. If you don’t export it
from the language module, it’s not there. [Well, mostly] Implicitly the client
module already refers to #% forms already.
> On May 25, 2017, at 7:09 PM, Vityou wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 2:05:23 PM U
On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 2:05:23 PM UTC-6, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
> Don’t eval. This is a bit crude but it now your lam-s keep track of your
> environment, too.
>
> #lang racket ;; new-lang.rkt
>
> (provide
> #%app
> #%datum
> #%top-interaction
> (rename-out
> (new-lambda lambda)
Don’t eval. This is a bit crude but it now your lam-s keep track of your
environment, too.
#lang racket ;; new-lang.rkt
(provide
#%app
#%datum
#%top-interaction
(rename-out
(new-lambda lambda)
(new-mb #%module-begin)))
(require racket/stxparam)
(define-syntax (new-lambda stx)
On Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 12:05:19 PM UTC-6, Vityou wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 8:21:59 PM UTC-6, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
> > Try to start with this:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > #lang racket ;; new-lang.rkt
> >
> >
> > (provide
> > #%app
> > #%datum
> > #%top-interaction
> >
On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 8:21:59 PM UTC-6, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
> Try to start with this:
>
>
>
>
>
> #lang racket ;; new-lang.rkt
>
>
> (provide
> #%app
> #%datum
> #%top-interaction
> (rename-out
> (new-lambda lambda)
> (new-mb #%module-begin)))
>
>
> (define-syntax
Try to start with this:
#lang racket ;; new-lang.rkt
(provide
#%app
#%datum
#%top-interaction
(rename-out
(new-lambda lambda)
(new-mb #%module-begin)))
(define-syntax (new-lambda stx)
(syntax-case stx ()
[(_ (x ...) e ...)
#'(lam '(x ...) '(e ...) (lambda (x ...) e ...)
On Tuesday, May 23, 2017 at 7:17:18 PM UTC-6, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
> Why do you interpret S-expressions instead of re-mapping lambda and #%app?
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 23, 2017, at 9:14 PM, Vityou wrote:
> >
> > I might be able to do something like this, but what I'm looking for is
> > s
Why do you interpret S-expressions instead of re-mapping lambda and #%app?
> On May 23, 2017, at 9:14 PM, Vityou wrote:
>
> I might be able to do something like this, but what I'm looking for is
> something that will be able to show the variables available to it in adition
> to its sourc
I might be able to do something like this, but what I'm looking for is
something that will be able to show the variables available to it in adition to
its source. I'll probable have to do something like what you did with the
struct accept add a field with its available variables and modify #%ap
I think you will probably want to define an applicable struct type with
custom printing behavior and then replace Racket's lambda with your own
macro to create instances of that struct type. I think what you want may be
more complex than this, but here's an example that simply carries along its
own
In lambda calculus, the function is the only datatype, so it would be useful to
see the body of a function when it is returned in some expression in the repl
(so you can see what number was returned or some other encoding). I have got
this working by making a language where the reader turns the
18 matches
Mail list logo
