[racket-dev] Blame and re-provided bindings

On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Casey Klein
<clklein at eecs.northwestern.edu> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 14, 2011 at 4:35 PM, Stevie Strickland <sstrickl at ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
>> On Jan 14, 2011, at 5:24 PM, Casey Klein wrote:
>>
>>> Regardless, though, I still think we need some way to re-export a
>>> contracted value that makes the re-importer the negative party on the
>>> contract.
>>
>> I'm not necessarily in disagreement, but currently I think this should be an explicit action.
>
> Explicit is fine with me. I just want to avoid giving names to all the
> contracts and re-applying them in the re-provider.

FWIW, I'm currently in the 'implicit' camp. (Yes this is a switch for me.)

I think that most of the time that you re-provide something you really
wanted to put the same contract on it, so it seems like we should make
that easy.

Robby