I'm saying that I don't at the moment know how to avoid giving this
error, given the current behavior of `set/c`.
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 5:57 PM, Robby Findler
<ro...@eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote:
> Are you saying it is reasonable that a typed racket program should
> produce contract constructor errors like that?
>
> Robby
>
> On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 4:53 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <sa...@ccs.neu.edu>
> wrote:
>> The problem here is that `Any` is a special contract which isn't a
>> "chaperone contract", and `set/c` requires chaperone contracts.
>>
>> It's not obvious to me if this can be detected statically, but you can
>> work around this by changing `Any` to some other type.
>>
>> Sam
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Tony Garnock-Jones <to...@ccs.neu.edu>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> What could I be doing wrong here?
>>>
>>> #lang typed/racket
>>> (provide (struct-out foo))
>>> (struct: foo ([bar : (Setof Any)]))
>>>
>>> Racket 5.3.0.24 complains about it ("racket problem.rkt"):
>>>
>>> set/c: contract violation
>>> expected: chaperone-contract?
>>> given: #<make-contract>
>>> context...:
>>> /Users/tonyg/src/racket-typed-matrix/problem.rkt: [running body]
>>>
>>> The complaint vanishes if I comment out the provide, remove the bar
>>> field, or change the bar field's type to Any/Integer/etc.
>>>
>>> Tony
>>> ____________________
>>> Racket Users list:
>>> http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> sam th
>> sa...@ccs.neu.edu
>> ____________________
>> Racket Users list:
>> http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
--
sam th
sa...@ccs.neu.edu
____________________
Racket Users list:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
