On Sep 22, 2010, at 8:08 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: > Here I want to reiterate something that Vincent said, which is that > all of these clauses are just part of the type system, not the > optimizer. They enable the type system to know more things about the > arguments, and when the type system knows more, the optimizer can do > better. But this is just the type system, and as Vincent's example > showed up-thread, you can write a program that depends for > type-correctness on any one of these clauses.
While this is true on the surface, it is also true that one could get away with a significantly simpler type for < if one wouldn't to exploit this information somewhere. Since the only place where we really exploit it for now is the optimizer, I think it is fair that to implicitly equate the two. Of course, that does not mean the error message should mention this application. One day we may have another one. _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
