[racket-dev] Parametric/c (was Re: [plt] Push #22411: master branch updated)

On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Robby Findler
<robby at eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote:
> On Friday, April 8, 2011, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <samth at ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Robby Findler
>> <robby at eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote:
>>> I think I'm not in favor of the move of parametric/c into the contract
>>> library. Sam and I had a discussion about this is Austin, tho, so
>>> maybe I'm misremembering the outcome?
>>
>> One of us is definitely misremembering the outcome -- my memory was
>> that we decided that `parametric/c' was important and belonged
>> alongside `new-exists/c'.
>
> I thought I had convinced you that my "special casing the ->" way of
> looking at the world was sensible and that we didn't really have a
> good answer for what the Right Thing was.

Yes, this is my recollection as well, so less misremembering than I thought.

> I would be happy if this one were renamed to not take this general
> sounding name. Something like parametric->/c or something (perhaps
> even with a corresponding restriction that the thing inside be a fn,
> if that check isn't already there).
>
> Is that ok?

That sounds good to me.
-- 
sam th
samth at ccs.neu.edu