I think this could work, but you'd have to be careful about the
possibility that the struct is mutable even if undeclared in the
`require/typed`.
Sam
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone know why Typed Racket does not support importing polymorphic
> str
On 2013-08-07 08:55:17 -0700, Eric Dobson wrote:
> That doesn't solve the issue. The issue is not in struct/c and thus
> using struct/dc has the same problem. A immutable field cannot have a
> impersonator contract applied to it because that would be equivalent
> to mutating the field.
You're righ
That doesn't solve the issue. The issue is not in struct/c and thus
using struct/dc has the same problem. A immutable field cannot have a
impersonator contract applied to it because that would be equivalent
to mutating the field.
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 8:49 AM, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
> On 2013-08-
On 2013-08-07 08:42:53 -0700, Eric Dobson wrote:
> What is (posn X Y)? If you mean the obvious (struct/c posn X Y) you
> will run into issues with the fact that posn is immutable and
> therefore the contracts on its fields need to be flat or chaperone
> contracts, and parametric contracts are not.
What is (posn X Y)? If you mean the obvious (struct/c posn X Y) you
will run into issues with the fact that posn is immutable and
therefore the contracts on its fields need to be flat or chaperone
contracts, and parametric contracts are not.
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 8:32 AM, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
On 2013-08-07 08:18:41 -0700, Eric Dobson wrote:
> Ok, now I'm not so sure it is possible. Can you give what you think
> the contracts should be for your posn example? The issue that I see is
> that the parametricity is shared across different functions and I
> don't know how that is represented wi
Ok, now I'm not so sure it is possible. Can you give what you think
the contracts should be for your posn example? The issue that I see is
that the parametricity is shared across different functions and I
don't know how that is represented with racket contracts.
On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 6:13 AM, Asu
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
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.
I don't see a fundamental limitation to doing this either.
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013
Hi all,
Does anyone know why Typed Racket does not support importing polymorphic
structs using the #:struct keyword in `require/typed`? Is this a
fundamental limitation or just a "small matter of programming"?
i.e., I want to do something like
(require/typed lang/posn
[#:struct posn (A) ([x
10 matches
Mail list logo
