[racket-dev] check-match?

I'm not sure how to find the right incantation to pull this down, but
this commit looks good to push to our repo.

Robby

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 12:33 AM, Joe Gibbs Politz <joe at cs.brown.edu> wrote:
> I think I've successfully sent a thingie to you:
>
> https://github.com/plt/racket/pull/171
>
> Let me know if I Did It Wrong.  This is the first time I've clicked
> the "Pull Request" button on Github.
>
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:12 PM, Joe Gibbs Politz <joe at cs.brown.edu> wrote:
>> Gotcha.  match-pred can be a separate thing.
>>
>> check-match can also let you use the identifiers bound in the match with an
>> optional third argument, which relies on more than match-pred anyway.
>> That's what I'm doing.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:30 PM, Robby Findler <robby at eecs.northwestern.edu>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I think it is better to have a check-match since that way people are
>>> more likely to find it.
>>>
>>> Robby
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 7:56 PM, Joe Gibbs Politz <joe at cs.brown.edu>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>  (? P) => (lambda (x) (match x [P true] [_ false]))
>>> >
>>> > I like this quite a bit.  It wouldn't be crazy to add it as
>>> > match-pred(icate) right next to match-lambda, match-let, and friends
>>> >
>>> > (http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/match.html?q=match&q=match-pred#(form._((lib._racket/match..rkt)._match-lambda))).
>>> >
>>> > Then, for rackunit, it's just up to how much we like writing
>>> >
>>> > (check-match foo P)
>>> >
>>> > vs.
>>> >
>>> > (check-pred (match-pred P) foo)
>>> >
>>> > Both seem handy to me.
>>> >
>>> > _________________________
>>> >   Racket Developers list:
>>> >   http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
>>> >
>>
>>