[racket-dev] [plt] Push #21701: master branch updated

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 7:00 AM, Eli Barzilay <eli at barzilay.org> wrote:
>
> As for a suggestion, I don't have anything concrete (and I don't have
> nearly enough contract experience to say something concrete) -- but in
> general I prefer to see those important bits first, and the vague
> human text later.
>

This organization was my goal in suggesting that we tack an
explanation onto the old message. I was imagining something like this:

/Users/clklein/tmp/contract-violator.rkt:9.17:
 (file /Users/clklein/tmp/contract-violator.rkt)
 broke the contract (-> any/c any/c any/c) on #:equiv argument of
test-->; expected a procedure that accepts 2 mandatory arguments
without any keywords, given: 1. Possible fixes include changing (file
/Users/clklein/tmp/contract-violator.rkt) and changing the contract.