> P.S. I was surprised to see that list-ref in #lang lazy takes the args in > opposite order than in #lang racket (which takes the list first).
I'm seeing the same behavior: Welcome to DrRacket, version 5.0.99.6 [3m]. Language: Lazy Racket [custom]. > (list-ref '(1 2 3) 1) 2 > (list-ref 1 '(1 2 3)) . . C:\plt\collects\lazy\lazy.rkt:43:24: list-ref: expects type <non-negative exact integer> as 2nd argument, given: (1 2 3); other arguments were: 1 On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 3:40 AM, Mark Engelberg <[email protected]> wrote: > I get an error in 5.0.2, rather than 0. > > --Mark > > P.S. I was surprised to see that list-ref in #lang lazy takes the args in > opposite order than in #lang racket (which takes the list first). > > On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:27 PM, John Clements <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> I would expect this program to signal an error: >> >> #lang lazy >> >> (define zeros (cons 0 zeros)) >> >> (define should-be-error (list-ref (take 15 zeros) 1324)) >> >> >> ... but instead should-be-error is bound to zero. How can I take the >> 1000th element of a list with only 15 elements? I'm tempted to make snide >> comments about laziness, but I'm sure it'll backfire when it turns out that >> somehow that's the right answer after all. >> >> Bug report? >> >> John >> >> >> _________________________________________________ >> For list-related administrative tasks: >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users > > > _________________________________________________ > For list-related administrative tasks: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users > _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
