On Wed, 28 Aug 2019 09:23:03 -0400 Jon Zeppieri wrote: [...]
>> Does that mean that for higher-order function parameters, inst expects >> only the return type signature, not that of the function itself? > > The main point here is that `inst` needs substitutions for the type > _variables_, not for the types of the function arguments. Oh, _now_ it makes sense! I see now that I really misunderstood even the example in the reference entry for `inst`: I took "(inst cons Integer Integer)" to mean "two Integer args" (which of course would only account for the (Pairof a b) case and doesn't make sense in the context) instead of "two Integer type variables". Thank you for the detailed explanation! -- Štěpán -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/87blw9gzo0.fsf%40gmail.com.
