As far as I can tell they are up to date. <div> </div><div>Robby On Friday, June 28, 2013, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:12 PM, Robby Findler <<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, 'cvml', 'robby@eecs.northwestern.edu')">robby@eecs.northwestern.edu</a>> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:08 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, 'cvml', 'samth@ccs.neu.edu')">samth@ccs.neu.edu</a>> > wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 11:06 PM, Robby Findler >> <<a href="javascript:;" onclick="_e(event, 'cvml', 'robby@eecs.northwestern.edu')">robby@eecs.northwestern.edu</a>> wrote: >> > One fairly clear thing is that the mzlib manual can move into the >> > compatibility-lib. >> >> I agree. >> >> > We could move the mzlib-specific files from (the collection) >> > tests/racket >> > into a new tests/mzlib and put that into the compatibility-lib. >> > >> > But that probably requires actual adjustments because tests/racket is >> > load-based ... >> > >> > Probably all of the mzlib-specific tests could be made to run in a #lang >> > context without too much trouble, tho. >> >> I don't feel 100% confident mucking with the tests/racket >> infrastructure, and I don't know how worth it this would be. >> >> BTW, you have some commented-out tests in racket/private/contract that >> `(require mzlib/contract)`. >> >> > > I know. Is that a problem? No, I wouldn't think so. Just wondering if you had intended to update them. Sam </blockquote></div>