Jacqueline Firth

I dislike that the same check can do so many different things depending on the type of argument, but it's weird to have the `regexp?` case included while having a...

I agree with @rmculpepper. Having said that, @samth could you open an issue describing what sort of test filtering you'd like for the Typed Racket tests (I assume TR is...

Never knew that, the docs ought to mention it. I don't find it too useful though because with custom checks I'm always constructing the error message within the check, but...

Part of the issue is that due to racket/racket#4182, trying to remove the properties myself with `syntax-property-remove` doesn't work as it should. Calling `(syntax-property-remove stx 'splice-rh-id)` for example won't remove...

That makes sense. I'll give it some thought and tinkering. I really do appreciate all the work you've put into `brag` and Beautiful Racket. The former is a delight to...

No, because when `somerule` refers to `inline-expression` it will get the `(inline-expression ...)` wrapper. There's no way for `somerule` to refer to a rule named `expression` while specifying "actually I...

That's what I would do for an ordinary language, but I'm trying to make a macro-extensible language with `brag` so the parse trees I spit out from `read-syntax` will be...

1. Just checked, and yes this happens with `ragg` too. 2. Consider this code: ```scheme (require syntax/modread) (with-module-reading-parameterization (λ () (with-input-from-string "#lang racket/base 42" (λ () (read-syntax))))) ``` It produces...

That would work fine for me. The either-positional-or-keyword-arg thing is a bit odd, but I don't really see any way around it.

What about forcing sequences that are `known-finite?` when printing, and having `map`, `filter`, etc. return streams that are `known-finite?` if all the inputs were finite? This doesn't help with tests...