Consider in R<div><div>#lang racket</div><div><br></div><div>(require </div><div> racket/place/distributed)</div><div><br></div><div>(quote-module-path)</div></div><div>(module-path? (quote-module-path))</div><div>=></div>
<div>#<path:/home/ray/pathbug.rkt><br></div><div>#t</div><div><br></div><div>So a Path type satisfies the module-path? predicate in R.</div><div><br></div><div>In TR abbrev.rkt</div><div><div>(define -Module-Path (Un -Symbol -String</div>
<div> (-lst* (-val 'quote) -Symbol)</div><div> (-lst* (-val 'lib) -String)</div><div> (-lst* (-val 'file) -String)</div><div> (-pair (-val 'planet)</div>
<div> (Un (-lst* -Symbol)</div><div> (-lst* -String)</div><div> (-lst* -String (-lst* -String -String #:tail (make-Listof (Un -Nat (-lst* (Un -Nat (one-of/c '= '+ '-)) -Nat)))))))))</div>
</div><div><br></div><div>The TR definition of -Module-Path does not allow for a -Path.</div><div><br></div><div>TR `Module-Path' is not equivalent to R `module-path?'. They should agree, yes?</div><div><br></div>
<div><br></div>