I think that paths were added to to the Racket grammar since the Typed Racket definition was written, and the latter just needs an update.
Sam On Nov 10, 2012 2:25 PM, "Ray Racine" <ray.rac...@gmail.com> wrote: > Consider in R > #lang racket > > (require > racket/place/distributed) > > (quote-module-path) > (module-path? (quote-module-path)) > => > #<path:/home/ray/pathbug.rkt> > #t > > So a Path type satisfies the module-path? predicate in R. > > In TR abbrev.rkt > (define -Module-Path (Un -Symbol -String > (-lst* (-val 'quote) -Symbol) > (-lst* (-val 'lib) -String) > (-lst* (-val 'file) -String) > (-pair (-val 'planet) > (Un (-lst* -Symbol) > (-lst* -String) > (-lst* -String (-lst* -String -String #:tail > (make-Listof (Un -Nat (-lst* (Un -Nat (one-of/c '= '+ '-)) -Nat))))))))) > > The TR definition of -Module-Path does not allow for a -Path. > > TR `Module-Path' is not equivalent to R `module-path?'. They should > agree, yes? > > > > ____________________ > Racket Users list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users > >
____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
