Sure, but if we have the manpower/energy for this, then it would be nice to have, no? (We'd probably do something syntactically and not via runtime values, but the essential idea seems like it would carry over.)
Robby On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 11:05 AM, Matthias Felleisen <matth...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: > > While I have always liked doc strings in Lisps -- and koodos to Python for > copying another feature from Lisp -- is it as critical to HtDP programming as > built-in check-expect with coverage? (No but I think having it would be > nice.) Do ask the person who asked whether Python has coverage now. -- > Matthias > > > > On Jul 19, 2010, at 10:16 AM, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote: > >> Python apparently has a feature where you essentially put the >> contract/purpose in the text of a function, and when you type the >> function's name, it prints out that documentation. (It sounds like >> the docstrings of Common Lisp.) >> >> This came up on day 1, minute 15 of the TSRJ workshop. >> _________________________________________________ >> For list-related administrative tasks: >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev > > _________________________________________________ > For list-related administrative tasks: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev > _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
