I think we should change 'case'. I think we should also add a clear note to the documentation for case saying "this is not the same as 'case' in Scheme because it uses equal?, not eqv?" and giving a few examples to show the difference to head off any confusion.
Robby On Monday, November 26, 2012, Jon Zeppieri wrote: > The 'case-check' branch of my github fork now implements Robby's > suggestion. [https://github.com/97jaz/racket/tree/case-check] > > I ran the full build (including documentation), ran > collects/tests/run-automated-tests.rkt, and started up and played > around with DrRacket. The only logged messages were from the tests I > added, which specifically test the new behavior. > > -Jon > > On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 11:29 PM, Jon Zeppieri > <zeppi...@gmail.com<javascript:;>> > wrote: > > Thanks! -J > > > > On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 10:59 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt > > <sa...@ccs.neu.edu<javascript:;>> > wrote: > >> On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 10:50 PM, Jon Zeppieri > >> <zeppi...@gmail.com<javascript:;>> > wrote: > >>> > >>> Is there a way to give check-em a type for TR without breaking it for > >>> non-typed code? > >> > >> Yes, you should add an entry to typed-racket/base-env/base-special-env > >> for `check-em`. Note that you'll have to specify which module > >> `check-em` is defined in. > >> > >> -- > >> sam th > >> sa...@ccs.neu.edu <javascript:;> >
_________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev