I think it's best to fix the contract and docs so that #f is a valid result when the argument has no directory part.
At Thu, 15 Jul 2010 10:10:12 -0600, Jay McCarthy wrote: > This bug report > > http://bugs.racket-lang.org/query/?cmd=view&pr=11012 > > is due to > > path-only > > returning #f when given a base-less path. > > This breaks its contract, which should return path-for-some-system? > and #f is not path-for-some-system?. > > (BTW, there are no contracts in racket/path. I don't have a good grasp > on where we're allowed to use racket/contract.) > > path-only is hard-code to return #f when split-path returns a true > dir? or if the base it returns is not path-for-some-system?. I'm not > sure how this should be fixed, for the moment I'm going to declare the > PR not a bug as it is because the paths do not refer to any real file. > > Jay > > -- > Jay McCarthy <j...@cs.byu.edu> > Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University > http://teammccarthy.org/jay > > "The glory of God is Intelligence" - D&C 93 > _________________________________________________ > For list-related administrative tasks: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev