On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 9:52 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <sa...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: > On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Robby Findler > <ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote: >> Would it make sense for typed scheme to hook up with check syntax to >> show the type of subexpressions (say when mousing over parens or >> something)? I'm not sure if that's too late in general, but it seems >> like we're getting the point where we want to give programmers >> interactive feedback, at least about numbers. > > I think this is a good idea (made even better if we eventually have > Check Syntax running online).
This may be a while. Probably better not to wait. What if there were a mode where typed scheme didn't raise an exception when it found a type error but expanded into something that begins with a runtime error and leaves information around for check syntax to report, interactively? > A protocol like 'disappeared-binding > would work well for Typed Racket here. Probably you'd want more than that, right? Lets see if we can figure out what you'd want to display and then how check syntax could help you display it. Robby _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
