On 2014-07-18 09:52:26 -0500, Robby Findler wrote: > Unless someone knows why it is a bad idea, how about adding a #:all? > argument that flattens all the way down? > > I don't see many uses of flatten-begin in our tree, but the one in > compatibility/package sure looks like it could use the #:all? > argument. Ditto the one in TR (in class-prims.rkt). And I'm pretty > sure that replacing the hand-rolled loops in drracket for doing this > (they predate that library) would use the #:all? argument if they were > rewritten.
This sounds like a nice solution and it would be fine for my use-case too. Anyone have any reasons against? (otherwise I can make the change) Cheers, Asumu _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev