On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 10:36 AM, Matthew Flatt <mfl...@cs.utah.edu> wrote: > At Mon, 6 Dec 2010 10:25:57 -0600, Robby Findler wrote: >> I think I need more help to understand the programming problem better. > > Isn't Jay just saying that he needs contract-like things to implement > interoperability (among modules that have different representations of > XML/HTML)? > > Ok, maybe he shouldn't call them "contracts", but all the contract-like > infrastructure is currently called "contracts". Is there a way to reuse > that infrastructure and not call them "contracts"?
Sure, just use it. And indeed I said earlier in this thread that it was the name that I objected to (and Matthias has also now said the same thing with an explanation as to why). But this seems to perhaps be developing into something more interesting. Maybe there is something more general than contracts and we should have a contracts+X system that supports that, somehow. (Re-reading my messages I see that the tone of them was not good; sorry about that, Jay.) Robby _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
