This is fixed now. Thanks, Robby
On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 1:19 AM, John Clements <cleme...@brinckerhoff.org> wrote: > I'm working with Dave Herman's JavaScript package. I've found a problem and a > workaround, but I want to make sure there's not an easier workaround before I > convert a bunch of code. The following program illustrates the issue: > > #lang racket/load > > (module a racket > > ;; this formulation "works" (prints #t): > (define-struct/contract s ((a number?) (b number?)) #:transparent) > (provide (struct-out s)) > > ;; this formulation does not work (prints #f): > #;(define-struct s (a b) #:transparent) > > #;(provide/contract [struct s ([a number?] > [b number?])] > #;(struct-out s))) > > (module b racket > (require 'a) > (define-values (type _) (struct-info (make-s 3 4))) > (printf "type: ~s\n" type) > (printf "eq? ~s\n" > (eq? type > struct:s))) > > (require 'b) > > > The problem is that when a structure is defined using define-struct and then > a contract is provided at the boundary, the structure type returned by > struct-info doesn't compare to the exported struct's value using eq?. As the > code illustrates, I can work around this by pushing the contract down into > the definition of the structure itself. > > Before I change many pairs of structure-definitions & contracts, is there > some other simpler way to make this code "work"--that is, print #t? > > Thanks! > > John > > > ____________________ > Racket Users list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users > ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
