This Typed Racket term is well-typed: (+ 1 (if (= 0 (- 1 1)) 1 "x"))
This one isn't: (+ 1 (if (= 0 (- 2 2)) 1 "x")) This looks a bit strange to me, because usually one would expect well-typedness to be not destroyed by replacing "equals with equals". I'd like to know the rationale for this design. It would be nice if one of the designers could comment on this. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
