So, it has always behaved like this? I'm really surprised that I have never been bitten by this before. 8^)
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:51 PM, Robby Findler <ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote: > I think that the lack of information about tail calls can be particularly > pernicious in the presence of multiple value errors. It would be good to do > better, but I'm not sure how. The errortrace library contains what we > currently do so you'd want to experiment there if you have an idea. > > Robby > > > On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 1:13 PM, Pierpaolo Bernardi <olopie...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Ryan Culpepper <ry...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: >> > The line >> > >> > (date-day quando)99 >> > >> > looks pretty suspicious; with the 99 there, the first branch of the >> > enclosing 'if' expression returns 8 values but the second branch returns >> > 7 >> > values. >> >> Yes, that was the source of the error (a mistake due to me pressing >> the Num Lock key inadvertently). >> >> What had me stumped is that DrRacket gives no hint about the location >> of the error. Not even the right file! >> _________________________ >> Racket Developers list: >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev > > _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
