I too tried it (ages ago) and ended up roughly where Eli is, but I didn't want to judge since I wasn't actually trying to use it for something useful (and, as we all know, that can change how you use things and how well they work for you). So I wonder if anyone has a positive experience with this kind of searching in an "in anger" kind of setting?
Robby On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Eli Barzilay <e...@barzilay.org> wrote: > 6 minutes ago, Asumu Takikawa wrote: >> A few of us in the lab today were discussing how the Haskell >> community has this nice tool called Hoogle >> (http://www.haskell.org/hoogle) that lets you search Haskell docs by >> type. > > Are there any *practical* uses for that thing? > > (Not a flame, I tried it a few times, and it looked like i might be > useful in a language where you use point-free style to compose > functions -- so you might know the type that you need `(a -> b -> c) > -> (b -> c -> a)' but not the `flip' name. But such serches don't > see, to work. So from this shallow scan, it looks like one of these > things that sound cool on paper, but are useless in practice.) > > >> Is it at all feasible to supplement Racket's doc search to display >> contracts > > That won't be hard in itself, but the real problem is huge blocks of > text in the results which would make it much less useful. > >> and/or search by contract? (or type for TR) > > That would be more difficult, since the search will need to do a lot > more work. I'm also guessing that given that we have much more *text* > in contracts (as in "integer" and "resolved-module-path?"), it will > make searching show way more false positives. > > -- > ((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 > _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev