Agree that adding more dependencies may be problematic.
One solution would be instead of sending emails, to make this a true github
issue creation method which can be done with a simple prepopulated HTML link,
eg. (here title:"foo" and body:"bar"):
https://github.com/mbutterick/pollen/issues/new
Thank you so much Jack,
This certainly helps! I was following the tutorial
http://www.greghendershott.com/fear-of-macros/ - It turns out that it too
recommends syntax-parse at the very end :)
When I tried this, I got "syntax: no pattern variables before ellipsis in
template in: ..."
(require syn
The '...' that is causing the error is a '...' at the level of the
_initial/outer_ macro (define-primitive-application-syntax), and so your final
use of '...' is trying to splice a parameter of the _initial macro_
(define-primitive-application-syntax), but you are actually trying to output a
_l
Thanks Andrew ... I got past that error. I now get an error below -
" syntax-parse: expected clause in: ()"
(define-syntax (define-primitive stx)
(syntax-parse stx () ; ERROR
[(_ (primitive-name:id arg:id ...) body ...+)
#:with table-name
(format-id #'primitive-name "~a-prop
Remove the ().
The construct syntax-case needs the () which in general can be a list of
identifiers,
but most often an empty list, (), is used. Any identifiers in the list are
treated
by syntax-case as a literal.
The construct syntax-parse does not use a list of identifiers. It uses an
alternativ
Thanks Jens ...
I think I'm almost thereI get this "primitive-name: pattern variable
cannot be used outside of a template in: primitive-name" at the very end
now
(require syntax/parse/define)
(define-simple-macro (define-primitive-application-syntax
(primitive-name:id arg:id ...))
(defi
Here is a bit more.
#lang racket
(require (for-syntax syntax/parse racket/syntax)
syntax/parse/define)
(define-simple-macro (define-primitive-application-syntax
(primitive-name:id arg:id ...))
(define-simple-macro (primitive-name arg-expr:expr (... ...))
(list 'primitive-name arg-
I checked the calendar, because I thought I had gone into hibernation
and woken up on April Fool’s day.
Argh.
> On Sep 21, 2016, at 10:33 PM, Jay McCarthy wrote:
>
> I've just put a new package on the server: live-free-or-die
>
> This package lets you escape from Typed Racket's contract
Super!!! ... thanks a ton Jens.
Now I'll go over the docs to understand why it works :)
Regards,
Kashyap
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 8:52 AM, Jens Axel Søgaard
wrote:
> Here is a bit more.
>
> #lang racket
>
> (require (for-syntax syntax/parse racket/syntax)
> syntax/parse/define)
>
> (defi
I was using Racket's date. Then I found it was creating a local time when I
needed UTC. So I started using moments from (require gregor). Now I'm trying to
figure out how to get either a regular date from a moment, or better, how I can
get epoch seconds (from 1970-01-01T00:00:00Z) from a moment.
Is it possible to build a sequence of moments? (require gregor)
I had a sequence of seconds (since the epoch), as in:
(in-range start-seconds end-seconds seconds-in-a-day)
If I use moments, I'm wondering what goes in place of _HMM_:
(in-range start-moment end-moment _HMM_)
--
You receive
I solved my immediate problem by going back to dates and using:
(seconds->date secs-n [local-time?]) → date*?
secs-n : real?
local-time? : any/c = #t
and supplying #f as local-time.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubs
On Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 10:55:11 AM UTC-7, Geoffrey Knauth wrote:
> I was using Racket's date. Then I found it was creating a local time when I
> needed UTC. So I started using moments from (require gregor). Now I'm trying
> to figure out how to get either a regular date from a moment,
> On Sep 22, 2016, at 2:04 PM, Geoffrey Knauth wrote:
>
> Is it possible to build a sequence of moments? (require gregor)
>
> I had a sequence of seconds (since the epoch), as in:
>
> (in-range start-seconds end-seconds seconds-in-a-day)
>
> If I use moments, I'm wondering what goes in pla
> On Sep 22, 2016, at 3:12 PM, Jon Zeppieri wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Sep 22, 2016, at 2:04 PM, Geoffrey Knauth wrote:
>>
>> Is it possible to build a sequence of moments? (require gregor)
>>
>> I had a sequence of seconds (since the epoch), as in:
>>
>> (in-range start-seconds end-seconds seco
After not getting what I wanted (I got epoch seconds reflecting an
interpretation of my input as Local Time), I got what I wanted (epoch seconds
interpreting my input as UTC), but now that it is working, using date* vs.
date, I'm not sure why, when I vary inputs, I see no change in the output.
Now I see how silly I was in what I wrote above. In each case I specified time
14:51 and got 18:51, which means it is still interpreting my input as local
time. I want to be able to specify 1851Z and have it come out 1851Z, not
2251Z. I hope this makes sense.
--
You received this message be
On Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 3:17:50 PM UTC-4, Jon Zeppieri wrote:
> Oh, sorry: I thought you wanted a sequence of moments from start and end
> *seconds*. If you're starting with moments, you could just repeatedly add a
> second (if that's the increment you want).
The increment is a day (s
> On Sep 22, 2016, at 3:43 PM, Geoffrey Knauth wrote:
>
>> On Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 3:17:50 PM UTC-4, Jon Zeppieri wrote:
>> Oh, sorry: I thought you wanted a sequence of moments from start and end
>> *seconds*. If you're starting with moments, you could just repeatedly add a
>> sec
Looks great, thank you!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.
> On Sep 22, 2016, at 3:57 PM, Jon Zeppieri wrote:
>
>
>
>>> On Sep 22, 2016, at 3:43 PM, Geoffrey Knauth wrote:
>>>
>>> On Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 3:17:50 PM UTC-4, Jon Zeppieri wrote:
>>> Oh, sorry: I thought you wanted a sequence of moments from start and end
>>> *seconds*. If y
If I have a `raco` command that I want to add command completion too, how can I
do that?
Ideally I'm looking for some way to tell raco to dispatch to a particular
function whenever
shell completion is requested for any uses of my raco command. If there is no
way to do this
right now, what would
Shell completion (at least for bash, which I know best) isn't handled
by `raco` at all -- it's all done in bash. So I think you'd have to do
some shell script hacking.
Sam
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 5:30 PM, Jack Firth wrote:
> If I have a `raco` command that I want to add command completion too, h
Right, but shell completion varies by shell implementaiton so I was hoping that
raco
would have some built-in completion script that racket installs, and that
script would
dispatch to some racket code that implements custom completion for a particular
command
I'd like to stick something like thi
Right now, `raco` doesn't have anything like that, for either built-in
or custom commands. What there is currently is this code:
https://github.com/racket/shell-completion which basically hard-codes
options, and calls `racket` to complete `raco` commands. It knows
specifically about `raco planet` s
I agree. A terrific event. I wish every day could be RacketCon.
On Sep 21, 2016, at 2:55 PM, 'John Clements' via Racket Users
wrote:
> SO glad I went to RacketCon this year. Great to meet you, great to see you. A
> bunch of community members now have faces in my mind.
>
> Many thanks for al
On Sep 22, 2016, at 9:23 AM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
> I checked the calendar, because I thought I had gone into hibernation
> and woken up on April Fool’s day.
Those of us who have lived in New Hampshire take this matter quite seriously.
We've also learned to endure the teasing of people
Umm...if you're going to do this, why is it imperative, and not a require
transformer?
Also, I kind of agree with Matthias here...sigh. :'( Like, as far as I can
tell, this is even worse then typed/racket/unsafe, as the optimizer is
still run. O_o
~Leif Andersen
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 9:16 PM
> I wish every day could be RacketCon.
Oh god...while that would be fun...the AV nightmare...we'd need a dedicated
AV team to handle that... :/
~Leif Andersen
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 9:08 PM, Matthew Butterick wrote:
> I agree. A terrific event. I wish every day could be RacketCon.
>
>
> On S
If I knew how, I'd do unsafe-in, but I just know how to fake a typed
context. The whole point is to use the optimizer so libraries like math are
usable.
Jay
On Friday, September 23, 2016, Leif Andersen wrote:
> Umm...if you're going to do this, why is it imperative, and not a require
> transfor
> On Sep 22, 2016, at 9:39 PM, Jay McCarthy wrote:
>
> If I knew how, I'd do unsafe-in, but I just know how to fake a typed context.
> The whole point is to use the optimizer so libraries like math are usable.
Libraries like math/array would still be usable without the optimizer.
What you r
> Also, with typed/racket/unsafe the optimizer *is* still run, so that's
not any better *unless* you selectively choose what you want to be unsafe.
Woops, you are absolutely correct, I meant:
typed/racket/no-check
~Leif Andersen
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:27 PM, Alex Knauth wrote:
>
> On Sep
> On Sep 22, 2016, at 12:38, Geoffrey Knauth wrote:
>
> Now I see how silly I was in what I wrote above. In each case I specified
> time 14:51 and got 18:51, which means it is still interpreting my input as
> local time. I want to be able to specify 1851Z and have it come out 1851Z,
> not 2
33 matches
Mail list logo
