Gotcha. match-pred can be a separate thing. check-match can also let you use the identifiers bound in the match with an optional third argument, which relies on more than match-pred anyway. That's what I'm doing.
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:30 PM, Robby Findler <ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu>wrote: > I think it is better to have a check-match since that way people are > more likely to find it. > > Robby > > On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 7:56 PM, Joe Gibbs Politz <j...@cs.brown.edu> > wrote: > >> (? P) => (lambda (x) (match x [P true] [_ false])) > > > > I like this quite a bit. It wouldn't be crazy to add it as > > match-pred(icate) right next to match-lambda, match-let, and friends > > ( > http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/match.html?q=match&q=match-pred#(form._((lib._racket/match..rkt)._match-lambda)) > ). > > > > Then, for rackunit, it's just up to how much we like writing > > > > (check-match foo P) > > > > vs. > > > > (check-pred (match-pred P) foo) > > > > Both seem handy to me. > > > > _________________________ > > Racket Developers list: > > http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev > > >
_________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
