On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 12:28:51PM -0400, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> Five minutes ago, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 01:08:27AM -0400, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> > >
> > > Esoterica #2: You'll see functions like "gensym" and "gentemp" in
> > > some old Lisp dialects, and they will be used
Yesterday, Jay McCarthy wrote:
> (gensym) generates something that cannot be created again in anyway.
>
> Even it is printed as 'g1753, that doesn't mean typing 'g1753 will
> get the same thing, nor that (string->symbol "g1753") will either.
> This is the whole point of (gensym).
The process of c
Five minutes ago, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 01:08:27AM -0400, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> >
> > Esoterica #2: You'll see functions like "gensym" and "gentemp" in
> > some old Lisp dialects, and they will be used mostly to get around
> > problems of non-hygienic macros in that partic
On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 01:08:27AM -0400, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
>
> Esoterica #2: You'll see functions like "gensym" and "gentemp" in
> some old Lisp dialects, and they will be used mostly to get around
> problems of non-hygienic macros in that particular dialect. I don't
> recall seeing them used
All good points. I should also mention that formlets do this
automatically, which is why you don't name the fields when using
formlets.
Jay
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 11:08 PM, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> You are correct that it is effectively black magic, in that you probably
> don't need to know about
You are correct that it is effectively black magic, in that you probably
don't need to know about it right now. Only a small percentage of
Racket programmers will ever need to know about it.
When you look at the "reference/symbols.html" page of Racket
documentation, pretend that you don't see
(gensym) generates something that cannot be created again in anyway.
Even it is printed as 'g1753, that doesn't mean typing 'g1753 will get
the same thing, nor that (string->symbol "g1753") will either. This is
the whole point of (gensym).
The Web server (basicaly) runs symbol->string to create t
That sounds like a black magic. I am almost tempted to ask how it's done.
I imagined (gensym) would generate some unique sequence not used so
far. Why would this approach not work?
2011/7/31 Jay McCarthy :
> Gensym produces symbols that are not eq to any other symbols created any
> other way. Th
Gensym produces symbols that are not eq to any other symbols created any other
way. The bindings library produces symbols from strings, so they aren't eq to
the gensym'd one.
Jay
Sent from my iPhone
On 2011/07/31, at 15:13, J G Cho wrote:
> I am a bit puzzled by this error:
>
>
> Exceptio
9 matches
Mail list logo
