On Jun 23, 2013, at 8:34 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: >> >> After porting nearly everything I was left with typing up the command-line >> parser. However, I am getting a type error at the following simplified part: > > Here's a version that type checks: https://gist.github.com/samth/5847063 > > The key is giving a type annotation to `fname` using the #{} syntax. > Typed Racket can figure out how to typecheck the expansion only if you > give it that hint. And the #{} syntax is for adding such hints with > macros like `command-line` that didn't anticipate Typed Racket.
I think this answer is not fair. Because On Jun 23, 2013, at 2:21 PM, Tim K. wrote: > I wonder, why does fname have the "Any" type? Yes, I didn't explicitly give > fname a type, but I was hoping that the typed version of "command-line" > would do that is correct. command-line in a typed context should know that what flows into its world is a string. ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
