On 11 April 2018 at 06:48:49, Matthias Felleisen (matth...@felleisen.org) wrote:
> Perhaps the real problem is one of the contract/type system. We have seen
> effect systems
> over and over again, though usually they try to express complicated
> invariants and have
> them checked at compile t
Alexis says that
(-> vector? exact-integer? any/c void?)
is better than
(-> vector? exact-integer? any/c vector?)
because the former clearly signals the imperative nature of the function inside
of the spec while the latter could be either a read-only or a RW function.
Perhaps the re
Alexis King wrote on 04/10/2018 03:32 PM:
There is definitely a school of thought that buys into the idea of
returning “the thing being operated on” rather than returning nothing
for side-effectful functions. I think this is most characterized by
so-called “fluent interfaces”[1], a way of encod
> On Apr 10, 2018, at 14:00, David Storrs
> wrote:
>
> Aside from I/O, I can't think of too many cases where (void) is the
> intuitively correct or most useful return value, but it is extremely
> common throughout the built-in Racket functions. I'm not sure where
> you're drawing the lines on 'A
On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 1:18 PM, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> Good catch; I agree that it would be better if `gzip` returned the target
> path, in all cases.
>
> There is another change I'd make to that signature: currently, arg
> `out-file` is optional, of type `path-string?`, defaulting to
> `(path-ad
Good catch; I agree that it would be better if `gzip` returned the
target path, in all cases.
There is another change I'd make to that signature: currently, arg
`out-file` is optional, of type `path-string?`, defaulting to
`(path-add-extensionin-file".gz"#".")`. In a backward-compatible way,
A lot of functions in Racket return (void) instead of a useful value.
One example is the gzip function from file/gzip; it would be useful if
this returned the filepath to which the file was compressed, but
instead it simply returns (void).
I have a lot of respect for Racket and its designers, so I
7 matches
Mail list logo