On Oct 24, 2010, at 8:04 PM, Doug Williams wrote: > On the case-> problem, it seems it no longer supports anything but ->. Is > there something I am missing there?
This is a current limitation for case-> as provided by racket/contract. When I tackle the conversion of case-> to proxies/chaperones, I plan on also removing this limitation if possible. If it works out, case-> should work with contract values given for the clauses (and also any type of arrow contract value) instead of being limited to direct uses of the simple -> combinator. Stevie _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
