On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Matthias Felleisen <matth...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: > > 1. I like Robby's mode suggestion. > 2. I prefer shorter keywords, e.g., define-judgment.
I'm having trouble reconciling these comments. Robby's suggestion, if I understand it correctly, is to overload the `define-relation' name instead of choosing a new one. If you supply the #:mode keyword, you get the `define-judgment-form' behavior (inputs and outputs, static checking, the `judgment-holds' syntax for application); if not, you get the current `define-relation' behavior. Do you mean keep the forms separate but use the name `define-judgment' for the new one? I intentionally avoided that name because what it defines, for example `sum', is not itself a judgment. Judgments are uses of that thing, i.e., assertions about particular objects, for example (sum z z z). > 3. Why is this in github and not in the docs? > Oh, good idea! _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
