[racket] Typed Racket Binding For Plot

I was thinking of turning of type checking and the translation of types into contracts. (Unless I misunderstand your mini language, I think you're cheating in a more fundamental manner "-) 


On Nov 3, 2012, at 11:41 AM, Jay McCarthy wrote:

> I have a little language for doing this:
> 
> https://github.com/jeapostrophe/exp/tree/master/tr-cheat
> 
> run
> 
> https://github.com/jeapostrophe/exp/blob/master/tr-cheat/tr-cheat-use.rkt
> 
> to see the SEGFAULT
> 
> :)
> 
> 
> On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Matthias Felleisen <matthias at ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
> 
> On Nov 3, 2012, at 11:13 AM, Neil Toronto wrote:
> 
> > On 10/29/2012 07:03 AM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Oct 29, 2012, at 12:31 AM, Neil Toronto wrote:
> >>
> >>> I wouldn't mind changing the API; it would be nice to have things like `points' accept sequences anyway. I haven't put much thought into what would be in the sequences, though.
> >>
> >>
> >> Question: can you change the API for the Typed version and support both APIs for the Untyped one? -- Matthias
> >
> > More easily than the other way around. Also, that would work around the covariance problem with vectors. I could change the contract to accept a sequence of vectors or lists, and use the type (Sequenceof (List Real Real)).
> >
> > I still need a `->*' type constructor, because most plot functions have 2-5 optional arguments and 10-20 arguments altogether. For the largest functions, a `case->' type would be huge and easy to get wrong. Also, I'm morally opposed to types that don't fit on my screen.
> >
> > I'll get around to submitting a formal request, after I get this Poisson distribution quantile function working...
> >
> > Neil ⊥
> >
> 
> 
> Last night Sam, Tony and I had a discussion on TR/R boundaries
> for his "racket on a router" project. Tony ported his software
> from Racket to Typed Racket and stopped halfway in between. The
> 'framework' (aka kernel) is now in TR and the 'user program' aka
> 'client' lives in R. I had predicted that the boundary between the
> two would cause a severe performance and Tony has now confirmed
> this conjecture. (We are talking factors not small percentages.)
> 
> As you get racket/math ready for production, I think you too should
> measure the performance hit from going across the boundary. If it
> is bad, we should consider including both a typed and an untyped
> variant where the latter is generated from the former (I believe
> you are working in TR so that's why I wrote the last sentence).
> That is, when the library is installed the Untyped one should be
> generated by disabling types and type checking.
> 
> -- Matthias
> 
> 
> ____________________
>   Racket Users list:
>   http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Jay McCarthy <jay at cs.byu.edu>
> Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University
> http://faculty.cs.byu.edu/~jay
> 
> "The glory of God is Intelligence" - D&C 93

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20121103/d7b57bbe/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4373 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20121103/d7b57bbe/attachment.p7s>