Perfect, that did the trick, thanks! On Wednesday, January 2, 2019 at 7:52:40 PM UTC-8, Robby Findler wrote: > > Did you try using `current-traced-metafunctions` ? It is poorly named, > I know. And, even worse, I see that the docs don't actually say that > it traces judgment forms too. > > Robby > > On Wed, Jan 2, 2019 at 9:18 PM Joey Eremondi <joey.e...@gmail.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > > > > I'm wondering, is there a way to show some sort of trace for a call to > judgment-holds that returns '() or #f? > > > > I'm in a situation where a judgment that I expect to hold does not, and > it's tricky to find out by hand where it is failing. The #mode requirement > for the judgments suggests an obvious algorithm for establishing whether a > judgment holds, which I assume is what judgment-holds uses. Is there any > way to see what steps it takes, and were it fails? > > > > -- > > 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...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. > > 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 racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
