On Sunday, 24 May 2015 08:14:30 UTC+10, Alex Knauth wrote: > As far as I know, this doesn’t exist in typed racket currently, but I’m > wondering: (I’m thinking of seeing if I can implement this when I have time > this summer) > > How should sub-typing interact with this? > Should it be a completely separate type, not related by sub-typing at all, or > should the new type be a subtype of the representation type? > What should happen if values with these types crossed into untyped code? > What should happen if an untyped program passes a normal flonum to a function > that was supposed to accept Radians? > Would you want to be able to supply a predicate to check properties of the > values of the new type?
As a Racket newb I'm hugely under-qualified to respond to these issues--I'll defer to the more experienced Racket community. I'll also take the hint that since the wonderful typed racket math library does not do this with angles I should avoid it (for now) too. Stu -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
