(0 #f . -> . Result?))]))
But the contract system complained that both might match (I mean I can see
that one is more specific, but I understand it's not a theorem prover,
haha).
Thoughts?
Chris
On Fri, Feb 15, 2019 at 7:56 AM Chris GauthierDickey
wrote:
> I
ontract is not actually attached to the
> > bt structure at this point? That's a thing that would be done
> > elsewhere, probably in the provide statement. Yes?
> >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 7:57 PM Chris GauthierDickey <
> chris...@gma
I'm wondering if it's possible to have a contract for a struct that only
allows certain kinds of initializations. For example, I have this:
(provide (contract-out
[struct Result ((name (or/c Temp? Label?)) (global? boolean?)
(value (or/c VarValue? #f)))]))
But it's too general. What I'd
, 2019 at 8:47 PM Robby Findler
wrote:
> The lexers can be tricky to get right. I struggled with them a lot. Good
> luck!
>
> Robby
>
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 6:29 PM Chris GauthierDickey
> wrote:
>
>> Yes, indeed, it's my own #lang I'm having issues w
ng function. It can be hard to get those right and the colorer
> calls into your lang's reader in ways that you might not have realized
> you should test.
>
> Are you using the lexer-contract? Sometimes that can help you find the
> input to your lexer that is doesn't work on.
Hi!
I seem to have some weird behavior with syntax coloring a #lang. Sometimes
it seems to think particular words that are normally correctly colored are
errors.
For example, if I'm starting to type a keyword, it's coloring it red (which
it should), but when I complete the word, it doesn't re-col
Greetings all,
Googled around and searched through documents but I couldn't find an
answer. Me and a colleague built a #lang on top of racket and I've been
able to get it to run in the Definitions window of Dr Racket but not in the
REPL (either in Dr. Racket or from the command line). I'm not ge
7 matches
Mail list logo
