On 06/15/2012 01:12 PM, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
Hi all,
Recently I was using the `stx-car` function from `syntax/stx`. At some
point, I had called it on a non-syntax pair and the error message came
from `car`, which is used inside the implementation of `stx-car`.
I thought it would be nice to add contracts in `syntax/stx` for better
error messages, but it turns out that the contract library depends on it
and so it's impossible to do without introducing cycles.
So I would like to propose a `syntax/syntax` library with the following:
* provides `syntax/stx` functions with contracts attached
(caveat: core libraries like `racket/contract` would still use
`syntax/stx`)
* for consistency with the rest of the language, `stx-car` and
friends would be renamed to use the `syntax-` prefix instead of
`stx-`.
-1
The 'stx-*' functions work on values that aren't syntax objects, so
renaming them to 'syntax-*' would be misleading. Also, 'syntax->list'
already exists and means something different from 'stx->list'.
Roughly,
stx = syntax | null | (cons syntax stx)
--
I sometimes wonder if we should make a racket/pre-contracts
subcollection and just stuff all of racket/contract/base's dependencies
in there, then say everything else is allowed (maybe even expected) to
use contracts.
Ryan
_________________________
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
