On 08/12/2012 06:14 PM, Ray Racine wrote:
Just completed a first cut draft TRing the Plot collection. Completely
untested, though the few things I've tried worked fine.
Neil/Sam, any suggestions, naming or layout conventions are much
appreciated. Otherwise, I'll do a cleanup pass, test it, and initiate a
pull-request this week.
https://github.com/RayRacine/racket/tree/tr-plot/collects/typed/plot
Cool!
This is probably going to annoy you, but the `Option' type doesn't mean
the argument isn't required. The entry for `surface3d' is currently
[surface3d ((Real Real -> Real)
(Option Exact-Rational)
(Option Exact-Rational)
(Option Exact-Rational)
(Option Exact-Rational)
.... -> Renderer3d)]
where `....' represents the keyword argument types. To account for the
possible argument combinations, it should be
[surface3d
(case-> ((Real Real -> Real)
.... -> Renderer3d)
((Real Real -> Real)
(Option Exact-Rational)
.... -> Renderer3d)
((Real Real -> Real)
(Option Exact-Rational)
(Option Exact-Rational)
.... -> Renderer3d)
((Real Real -> Real)
(Option Exact-Rational)
(Option Exact-Rational)
(Option Exact-Rational)
.... -> Renderer3d)
((Real Real -> Real)
(Option Exact-Rational)
(Option Exact-Rational)
(Option Exact-Rational)
(Option Exact-Rational)
.... -> Renderer3d))]
I agree with you that this is insane, and that Sam or Vincent should do
something about it. :D
In the meantime, write a new macro to use instead of
`require/typed/provide'. (Macros inside types won't expand.)
Fortunately, function types with keyword arguments already expand to
`case->' types, so you don't have to change anything about those.
Neil ⊥
_________________________
Racket Developers list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
