On May 23, 2013, at 9:34 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <sa...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
>> 2. Is it possible that we could solve the problem via a bootstrapping-only >> violation of our policy that you can add types to Racket w/o modifying >> existing modules? > > No. We can't specify types inside `racket/base` without making `racket/base` > depend on Typed Racket. 1. I was proposing a fundamental change to the language, with an eye toward Racket 2. 2. I was also proposing an experiment that temporarily creates such a dependency and we can then look for a refactoring that breaks the dependency again but in a way that supports the proper access to these base identifiers. _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
