5 minutes ago, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
> On 2011-06-10 13:11:51 -0700, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> > I'm more in favor of using `(and/c real? (not/c negative?))'.
>
> Stevie just pointed out that the following contract is equivalent and
> shorter:
> (>=/c 0)
>
> so I'll go with that.
(I find `>=/c' very hard to read... On one hand, the `/' makes it
look like a kind of negation, and OTOH, it looks like some ascii
rendering of a toy train.)
--
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!
_________________________________________________
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
