<div dir="ltr"><div><div>Wayne,<br><br></div>You cannot read in a set. If you read in the result of print, you get '(set 1 2 3), which is a list beginning with the symbol 'set, not a set. Sets are a derived datatype using structs, not a primitive on recognized by read and write. You can use the functions serialize and deserialize to store sets, if you need to.<br>
<br></div>--Carl<br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Wayne Iba <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:iba@westmont.edu" target="_blank">iba@westmont.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>If I evaluate (write myset) for myset as (set 1 2 3), the format of
the output is "#<set: 1 2 3>", whereas (print myset) produces
"(set 1 2 3)". Naturally, I can read in the latter but not the former.
From the docs, I believe the expectation is that we can rely on the
output of write for reading, but not necessarily that of print.<br>
<br></div><div>Am I missing something here or is this a problem with how racket is writing sets? (I'm using v5.3.5)<br><br></div><div>Thanks,<br></div>--Wayne<br></div>
<br>____________________<br>
Racket Users list:<br>
<a href="http://lists.racket-lang.org/users" target="_blank">http://lists.racket-lang.org/users</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>