6 minutes ago, Asumu Takikawa wrote: > A few of us in the lab today were discussing how the Haskell > community has this nice tool called Hoogle > (http://www.haskell.org/hoogle) that lets you search Haskell docs by > type.
Are there any *practical* uses for that thing? (Not a flame, I tried it a few times, and it looked like i might be useful in a language where you use point-free style to compose functions -- so you might know the type that you need `(a -> b -> c) -> (b -> c -> a)' but not the `flip' name. But such serches don't see, to work. So from this shallow scan, it looks like one of these things that sound cool on paper, but are useless in practice.) > Is it at all feasible to supplement Racket's doc search to display > contracts That won't be hard in itself, but the real problem is huge blocks of text in the results which would make it much less useful. > and/or search by contract? (or type for TR) That would be more difficult, since the search will need to do a lot more work. I'm also guessing that given that we have much more *text* in contracts (as in "integer" and "resolved-module-path?"), it will make searching show way more false positives. -- ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay: http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life! _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev