The contract extension of Typed Racket are still pending Sam’s review.
> On Jul 1, 2017, at 12:41 PM, Zelphir Kaltstahl <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I tried some simple examples of Typed Racket recently and then I thought I > could try some things with contracts too. > > However, I do not seem to be able to contract-out any Typed Racket struct. > For example: > > > ~~~ > #lang typed/racket > > (struct WordMetadata > ([id : String] > [learned : Boolean] > [description : String])) > > (provide (contract-out > [struct WordMetadata > (id string?) > (learned boolean?) > (description string?)])) > ~~~ > > > would underline the parenthesis immediately before contract-out, telling me > that: > > > ~~~ > contract-out: not a provide sub-form > ~~~ > > > The simple examples in the docs always use: > > > ~~~ > #lang racket > ~~~ > > > After a lot of wondering what I am doing wrong, I am guessing, that because > Typed Racket creates its own contracts for the types of the structs, I cannot > put contracts on them and contract-out does not accept such structs, as > opposed to structs of #lang racket. > > However, I am only guessing. (Is this correct?) > > And if if is correct or at least something in that direction, does it even > make sense to combine Typed Racket with contracts, or am I maybe trying to do > something which does not really make sense? > > -- > 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 [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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 [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
