[racket-dev] racket/match is broken

On Oct 8, 2011, at 12:42 PM, Robby Findler wrote:

>> 
>> I doubt that this applies but I am willing to look at
>> counter-examples.
> 
> One has been discussed in this thread. I think Sam promised to look
> into seeing how well it applies to our implementation.


Sorry, I skipped some messages. 


>>> I don't mind if the ordering of calling the predicates is fixed when
>>> match cannot prove that the predicates are all safe to be reordered
>>> (presumably by match keeping a list of known-to-be-safe predicates
>>> somewhere and perhaps looking at the compile-time info to find struct
>>> predicates).
>>> 
>>> (That would seem to be a straight-forward change, unless I'm missing something.)
>> 
>> 
>> That would be fine too.
>> 
> 
> Good.


Yes, because this is in practice left-to-right :-)