I'm not sure how to find the right incantation to pull this down, but this commit looks good to push to our repo.
Robby On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 12:33 AM, Joe Gibbs Politz <j...@cs.brown.edu> wrote: > I think I've successfully sent a thingie to you: > > https://github.com/plt/racket/pull/171 > > Let me know if I Did It Wrong. This is the first time I've clicked > the "Pull Request" button on Github. > > On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:12 PM, Joe Gibbs Politz <j...@cs.brown.edu> wrote: >> Gotcha. match-pred can be a separate thing. >> >> check-match can also let you use the identifiers bound in the match with an >> optional third argument, which relies on more than match-pred anyway. >> That's what I'm doing. >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:30 PM, Robby Findler <ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu> >> wrote: >>> >>> I think it is better to have a check-match since that way people are >>> more likely to find it. >>> >>> Robby >>> >>> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 7:56 PM, Joe Gibbs Politz <j...@cs.brown.edu> >>> wrote: >>> >> (? P) => (lambda (x) (match x [P true] [_ false])) >>> > >>> > I like this quite a bit. It wouldn't be crazy to add it as >>> > match-pred(icate) right next to match-lambda, match-let, and friends >>> > >>> > (http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/match.html?q=match&q=match-pred#(form._((lib._racket/match..rkt)._match-lambda))). >>> > >>> > Then, for rackunit, it's just up to how much we like writing >>> > >>> > (check-match foo P) >>> > >>> > vs. >>> > >>> > (check-pred (match-pred P) foo) >>> > >>> > Both seem handy to me. >>> > >>> > _________________________ >>> > Racket Developers list: >>> > http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev >>> > >> >> _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
