[plt-scheme] Contracts: having ->r and opt->

Yes, case-> works. But it would be nice if we have more macros for such cases, say opt->r and opt->pp.

Chongkai

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Noel Welsh" <noelwelsh at yahoo.com>
To: "Paulo J. Matos" <pocm at soton.ac.uk>; "PLT-list Mailing" <plt-scheme at list.cs.brown.edu>
Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2007 9:37 AM
Subject: Re: [plt-scheme] Contracts: having ->r and opt->


> Appears not:
> 
> (require (lib "contract.ss")
>         (lib "etc.ss"))
>  
> (define/contract foo
>  (->r ((x number?) (y (>/c x))) z (cons/c number? null?) any)
>  (opt-lambda (x y [z 0])
>    (+ x y z)))
> 
> [bug] 3:3: foo broke the contract 
>  (->r ((x ...) (y ...)) z ... ...)
> on foo; expected a procedure that accepts 2 arguments and aribtrarily more (not arity (2 3)), got  #<procedure:foo>
> 
> The only alternative I can see is to use case->, but the docs say ->r is not allowed as an alternative in case->:
> 
> 
> The case-> expression constructs a contract for
> case-lambda function. It's arguments must all be function
> contracts, built by one of ->, ->d,
> ->*, or ->d*.
> 
> Except the docs lie:
> 
> (define/contract foo
>  (case->
>   (->r ((x number?) (y (>/c x))) any)
>   (->r ((x number?) (y (>/c x)) (z number?)) any))
>  (opt-lambda (x y [z 0])
>    (+ x y z)))
> 
>> (foo 1 2 3)
> 6
>> (foo 1 2)
> 3
>> (foo 2 1)
> [bug] 7:3: 7:2 broke the contract 
>  (case->
>    (->r ((x ...) (y ...)) ...)
>    (->r ((x ...) (y ...) (z ...)) ...))
> on foo; expected <(>/c 2)>, given: 1
>> 
> 
> I guess this is an oversight in the documentation of the contract language
> 
> 
> N.
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Paulo J. Matos <pocm at soton.ac.uk>
> To: PLT-list Mailing <plt-scheme at list.cs.brown.edu>
> Sent: Sunday, April 8, 2007 11:10:18 AM
> Subject: [plt-scheme] Contracts: having ->r and opt->
> 
> Hello all,
> 
> Is it possible to have contracts for opt-lambda which arguments depend
> on each other?
> 
> For example:
> (define foo
>   (opt-lambda (x y [z 0])
>    ....))
> 
> x, y and z should be numbers and y should be bigger than x. Is it
> possible to say this in a contract?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> -- 
> Paulo Jorge Matos - pocm at soton.ac.uk
> http://www.personal.soton.ac.uk/pocm
> PhD Student @ ECS
> University of Southampton, UK
> _________________________________________________
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Be a PS3 game guru.
> Get your game face on with the latest PS3 news and previews at Yahoo! Games.
> http://videogames.yahoo.com/platform?platform=120121
> _________________________________________________
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme
>