Noah Ma

I guess this example may provide more information: ``` #lang typed/racket (module before typed/racket (begin-for-syntax (define times 0) (set! times (add1 times)) (displayln times)) (displayln "hello world!")) (require 'before) (begin-for-syntax...

If only a few aliases are needed, I think providing them in a user library is sufficient. But considering the above examples: `ExtFloat-Positive-Zero` and `Nonnegative-Exact-Rational`, I hope that the various...

> another solution to avoiding typing is to use auto-completion or abbreviation provided by your editor. Thanks for your suggestion, auto-completion can indeed make writing types easier, but I still...

I was wondering if we could extend `assert` to verify that the argument doesn't satisfy the constraint? For example: ```racket Welcome to Racket v8.5 [cs]. > (require (for-syntax racket/base)) >...

My initial motivation was that I found myself often use `predicate` to check the same variable in `cond` by `and`, `or` and `not`, it looks cumbersome in these cases. And...

I'm sorry my thoughts were a bit confusing, maybe I need some time to sort out them. I wonder if you are willing to provide types for `and/c` and `or/c`...

I want to implement generic functions in Typed Racket, so I need a converter to unify the types of TR functions into `[-> Val * Val]`. For example, the `cons`...

> I can't figure out how to assign a type this early in the morning. I think `case->` should work: ``` Welcome to Racket v8.4 [cs]. > (require typed/racket/unsafe) >...

I agree with you, and what I want to emphasize is that `Values` is the return value of a function, so we should pay attention to the symmetry between it...

> to use it with call-with-values where the receiver function had a type of the form (-> Integer * ). Yes, that is what I need. > whether supporting this...