Okay. Thanks! --jmj On May 18, 2014, at 1:52 PM, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
> On 2014-05-16 10:04:17 -0700, Jordan Johnson wrote: >> As part of familiarizing myself with Typed Racket I thought I'd port one >> or two of the untyped Racket libraries to TR. This raised a few questions: >> 1) Looking at the TR docs and GitHub repo, AFAICT new library ports go >> in pkgs/typed-racket-pkgs/typed-racket-more/typed -- is that right? > > Yes, that's right. Though in the long term with packages, I wonder if we > should have separate packages for the typed versions of libraries. > >> 2) I don't see documentation or tests for other ported libraries in >> general, presumably because they're just wrappers; so, does it suffice to >> submit only one file -- the library itself -- or are there more files I'm >> not noticing, that go with each library? (Seems I should be documenting >> the types I define, but I don't see where those docs would go.) > > You're right, we don't currently have docs or tests in place for those > wrappers. If you'd like to add some tests, it would probably make sense > to put them under `typed/<library>/tests` or `typed/tests/<library>` > perhaps. > >> 3) One of the libs I looked at porting, openssl, raised a question about >> subtyping: SSL ports. It appears to me that internally these are standard >> Racket input/output ports tagged as special by the openssl library. It >> seems straightforward enough to create an opaque type like >> >> (require/opaque-type SSL-Port ssl-port? openssl) >> >> but that doesn't capture the idea that every ssl-port should also be of >> type Input-Port or Output-Port (as defined in TR already). First, is that >> idea correct? And if so, what piece am I missing, to make that happen? > > Unfortunately, there isn't currently a good way to specify that a > datatype implements an "interface" like being a port, a synchronizable > event, etc. in Typed Racket. > > For this case, it probably makes sense to just use the built-in Port > types, which makes the types less precise but it'll work. So you'd give > `ssl-abandon-port` a type like `(-> Port Void)`. Similarly, the > `tcp-abandon-port` function has that same type even though it's supposed > to only take tcp-ports. > > Cheers, > Asumu ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
