Sam, thanks very much for the response.
I only looked at the documentation for for/first after Dr Racket said "add
more type annotations" a few times. From a user viewpoint, I feel that a
usually non-functioning form would benefit from an example of working usage
so that I can bend my form
Hi JG,
You're correct that the `for/first` and `for/last` forms don't work
usually in TR, but that's what the documentation says: "Like the
above, except they are not yet supported by the typechecker.". Is
there a different way that could be phrased to make this clearer?
The omission of
In doing some typed/racket, I have noticed some mismatch between observed
behavior and the documentation at
https://docs.racket-lang.org/ts-reference/special-forms.html
1) Documentation suggests that for/first and for/last should work, yet they
seem to not type check. I've noticed sparse
3 matches
Mail list logo
