Re: [racket] Using prefix-out with contract-out together

2013-08-04 Thread Carl Eastlund
I've added your email to the bug report, so you'll be notified of any updates. Carl Eastlund On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 3:46 AM, Lawrence Woodman wrote: > On 03/08/13 08:00, Carl Eastlund wrote: > > That sounds like a bug in contract-out and/or prefix-out. There's no > reason they shouldn't work r

Re: [racket] Using prefix-out with contract-out together

2013-08-04 Thread Lawrence Woodman
On 03/08/13 08:00, Carl Eastlund wrote: That sounds like a bug in contract-out and/or prefix-out. There's no reason they shouldn't work right together. And I can confirm the bug -- the bindings get exported with contracts, but by their original names. I assume that's the behavior you're seei

Re: [racket] Using prefix-out with contract-out together

2013-08-03 Thread Carl Eastlund
That sounds like a bug in contract-out and/or prefix-out. There's no reason they shouldn't work right together. And I can confirm the bug -- the bindings get exported with contracts, but by their original names. I assume that's the behavior you're seeing as well. Carl Eastlund On Sat, Aug 3, 2

[racket] Using prefix-out with contract-out together

2013-08-02 Thread Lawrence Woodman
Hello, I would like to prefix the functions that I want to export from a module and provide a contract for each exported function. I tried the following style: (provide (prefix-out mymodule- (contract-out [func-a (-> string? any)] [func-b (->