On Sunday, 31 January 2021 at 08:07:27 UTC+11 Jens Axel Søgaard wrote: Den tor. 21. jan. 2021 kl. 05.06 skrev Stuart Hungerford < > [email protected]>: > >> [...] >> By using the Rust trait system (and later Haskell typeclasses) I could >> create structure traits/typeclasses that don't clash with the builtin >> numeric types or with the larger more production oriented libraries in >> those languages in the same general area of math. >> >> Once I added generative testing of the structure axioms I could >> experiment with, e.g. finite fields and ensure all the relevant axioms and >> laws were (at least probabilistically) met. >> > > Not knowing Rust nor traits, I have amused myself writing a very simple > version of traits. > > > #lang racket > (require (for-syntax syntax/parse racket/syntax)) > > ;;; > ;;; TRAITS > ;;; >
Many thanks Jens. This is an excellent example of Racket's build-your-own-abstractions philosophy at work. (Although where I live I would have used bream or sharks instead of herring ;-) If Hackett was still maintained I would probably use it too. Thanks, Stu -- 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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/4bd7fad3-0c68-46c0-9504-530b3d4e3ab4n%40googlegroups.com.
