That's what I thought you wanted it for so my answer stands -- Matthias
On Jun 15, 2014, at 12:55 AM, Spencer Florence wrote: > This is about making decisions at compile time. Specifically I have a > sequence of expressions I want to partition into expressions of some type T > and expressions of other types. > > > On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Robby Findler <ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu> > wrote: > Would it be enough to expand into an 'ann' expression? Or do you need > to make decisions at compile time based on whether or not the types > worked? > > Robby > > On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Matthias Felleisen > <matth...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: > > > > No, TR expands first, then checks. -- Matthias > > > > > > > > > > On Jun 14, 2014, at 2:59 PM, Spencer Florence wrote: > > > >> Hey All, > >> > >> I'm trying to take advantage of typed/racket in a few macros. Is there any > >> way to check the type of an expression from its syntax object? something > >> like: > >> > >> (:has-type? (-> Void) #'expression) > >> > >> > >> --Spencer > >> ____________________ > >> Racket Users list: > >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/users > > > > > > ____________________ > > Racket Users list: > > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users >
____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
