try to add type for lambda* and define*#31
Merged
ufo5260987423 merged 2 commits intoMoganLab:mainfrom Sep 7, 2025
Merged
Conversation
try to add type define* for process
| [(? symbol? expression) | ||
| index-node] | ||
| [(? pair? expression) | ||
| (car (index-node-children index-node))]))) |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here, you should make (cadr (index-node-children index-node)) type annotation. Because it usually denote spefici identifier-reference.
And then, you can
(extend-index-node-substitution-list (car (index-node-children index-node)) (cadr (index-node-children index-node))
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I don't fully understand the type inference mechanism. I mimicked the
defineandlambdarules to write the inference rules fordefine*andlambda*, delegating the task of extracting the index-nodes corresponding to the parameters to a new function. I'm not sure if this implementation is correct.