On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Robby Findler <ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote: > Is it possible there is another channel that TR could use to > communicate these types? That is, could it not expand > > (: f Integer) > (define f 5) > > into something that bound 'f' to a macro that knows its type? I guess > it already does that, so something doesn't work about that here, but > I'm not seeing what it is.
Typed Racket doesn't do this -- `f` is bound to the same thing it would be in Racket, and a separate side table at expansion time maintains the type information, following the recipe Matthew originally described in the "You Want it When?" paper. I don't think the `special binding` version would work, for a number of reasons (full local-expansion, handling the base environment, expansion-time bindings). -- sam th sa...@ccs.neu.edu _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
