[racket] Thoughts on Overeasy

On Aug 29, 2011, at 2:10 PM, Eli Barzilay wrote:

> Four hours ago, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>> 
>> On Aug 29, 2011, at 6:06 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
>> 
>>> I
>>> don't see a problem with deciding that
>>> 
>>> (test (dynamic-wind foo (λ () X) baz) Y)
>>> 
>>> is the test case instead of having `test' construct the extra code.
>> 
>> What if a 100 programmers write a 100 test cases with this pattern: 
>> 
>> (test (dynamic-wind <foo:p.n> (lambda () <X:p.n>) <baz:p.n>) <Y:p.n>) 
>> 
>> Where should this abstraction be defined? -- Matthias
> 
> The answer is in the part you snipped.  What's better (assuming some
> better name than `before/after'):
> 
>  (test #:before foo #:after bar X Y)
> 
>  (test (before/after foo bar X) Y)


block or protected