On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:12 PM, Robby Findler <ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <sa...@ccs.neu.edu> > wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:06 PM, Robby Findler >> <ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote: >> > One fairly clear thing is that the mzlib manual can move into the >> > compatibility-lib. >> >> I agree. >> >> > We could move the mzlib-specific files from (the collection) >> > tests/racket >> > into a new tests/mzlib and put that into the compatibility-lib. >> > >> > But that probably requires actual adjustments because tests/racket is >> > load-based ... >> > >> > Probably all of the mzlib-specific tests could be made to run in a #lang >> > context without too much trouble, tho. >> >> I don't feel 100% confident mucking with the tests/racket >> infrastructure, and I don't know how worth it this would be. >> >> BTW, you have some commented-out tests in racket/private/contract that >> `(require mzlib/contract)`. >> >> > > I know. Is that a problem?
No, I wouldn't think so. Just wondering if you had intended to update them. Sam _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev