That's just semantics, you dang logician
On Feb 13, 2013, at 10:09 PM, Carl Eastlund wrote: > That might not be what he wants either, if he wants anything representable as > a flonum to be a flonum. For instance, (S->F "5") is #false by your > implementation. It's hard to tell exactly what S->F is supposed to do > without more of a specification. > > Carl Eastlund > > > On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 10:04 PM, Matthias Felleisen <[email protected]> > wrote: > > #lang typed/racket > > (: S->F : String -> (Option Float)) > (define (S->F s) > (define n (string->number s)) > (and (flonum? n) n)) > > I assume you mean to convert strings into floats, if possible. > > But you may like the funny answers better -- Matthias > > > > On Feb 13, 2013, at 9:49 PM, Ray Racine wrote: > > > What is the most efficient way to write the following method in TR? > > > > (: S->F (String -> (Option Float))) > > > > > > ____________________ > > Racket Users list: > > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users > > ____________________ > Racket Users list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users > >
____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
