On 2013-08-06 21:53:14 -0700, Eric Dobson wrote: > I'm assuming you mean parametric contracts instead of polymorphic. But > not sure why those would be the correct solution, I think any/c would > work, I'm not seeing a case where wrapping the value would protect > anything.
Yes, I mean parameteric contracts. I think you want parameteric contracts so that you know, for example, that a struct accessor is actually giving you the value you put in a struct instead of some random unrelated value. Cheers, Asumu ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
