On 2013-02-06 06:34:42 -0600, Robby Findler wrote: > You don't get the same message-- the expected line is gone somehow.
The expected line is gone here because there's no number that would make sense. A `(case-lambda)` has no applicable arity (in particular, it's not zero). Maybe the arity error should say "unapplicable function"? Also, by a custom contract, I meant one that would produce a message about not allowing unknown procedures through rather than raising an obscure arity error. Cheers, Asumu ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
