On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 8:11 PM, Ray Racine <ray.rac...@gmail.com> wrote: > While it does work, there is definitely a loss of informative intent in the > sense of the "documentation" to the human reader provided by the type > signatures. If define-type is strictly an aliasing then the original > construction should work and its failure a bug. Do you agree? If so I'll > open a bug report.
This appears to be a bug -- TR complains about a non-regular type, but the type is actually regular -- the right hand side of `Continuation` just re-uses `A` and `D`. So filing a bug report would be great. -- sam th sa...@ccs.neu.edu ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
