Why not make this explicit by deprecating define/contract and support this use case with a submodule. They lightweight enough and makes boundary demarcations consistent, explicit and simple. Module -> boundary. On Nov 30, 2012 12:05 PM, "Matthias Felleisen" <matth...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
> > On Nov 30, 2012, at 10:15 AM, Greg Hendershott wrote: > > >> This is a complete misunderstanding. > > > > Sometimes I feel like a kid in the room while the adults are talking. > > When it comes to contracts, I have to stipulate that most of you are > > smarter than me and have thought about this longer than me. > > > Apologies. My opening wasn't meant to say "I am smarter" but I wanted > to send a strong message about define/contract. It really introduces a > boundary and in some strange sense your (possibly misleading) > microbenchmark > exposes this constraint too. > > > > ____________________ > Racket Users list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users > >
____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
