On Oct 7, 2014, at 2:38 PM, Jack Firth <jackhfi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I read a tweet about someone wistfully wishing there was some sort of "the"
> operator in a typed non-parensy language such that one could write something
> like this:
>
> Customer someFunc(the customer) { ... }
>
> and have it mean:
>
> Customer someFunc(Customer customer) { ... }
>
> Basically, an operator to take care of the common case where the variable
> name is just the lower-camel-case form of the type. As a Racket fan, I wanted
> to see if I could do this with a macro in Typed Racket. After some mucking
> around I had a form that handled the syntax correctly, but I couldn't use it
> in typed racket because the type checker and type annotations run as macros
> *before* my macro expands.
I thought typed racket expanded first and then type-checks?
> As I read further, it seems to be the case that macros in typed racket are a
> very thorny problem and an area of open research. So is it currently possible
> to implement a "the" operator like the one shown above in typed racket? And
> if so, how would it be done?
> ____________________
> Racket Users list:
> http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
____________________
Racket Users list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
