suzanne.soy/racket
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

typos

Browse Source 
svn: r11390
This commit is contained in:
Eli Barzilay 2008-08-22 16:08:29 +00:00
parent 896757cf1f
commit dfac6998fa
1 changed files with 13 additions and 13 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

8
collects/scribblings/guide/contracts-general-function.scrbl
View File

@ -125,7 +125,7 @@ arguments: @scheme[char?]. }
We all know that @scheme[+] in Beginner Scheme is a function We all know that @scheme[+] in Beginner Scheme is a function
that consumes at least two numbers but, in principle, that consumes at least two numbers but, in principle,
arbitraily many more. Defining the function is easy: arbitrarily many more. Defining the function is easy:
@schemeblock[ @schemeblock[
(define (plus fst snd . rst) (define (plus fst snd . rst)
(foldr + (+ fst snd) rst)) (foldr + (+ fst snd) rst))
@ -159,7 +159,7 @@ rest argument follows @scheme[#:rest]
Since the remainder of the actual arguments are collected Since the remainder of the actual arguments are collected
in a list for a rest parameter such as @scheme[rst], the in a list for a rest parameter such as @scheme[rst], the
contract demands a list of values; in this specific contract demands a list of values; in this specific
examples, these values must be number. examples, these values must be numbers.
@ctc-section[#:tag "keywords"]{Keyword Arguments} @ctc-section[#:tag "keywords"]{Keyword Arguments}
@ -307,7 +307,7 @@ Then, informally, the proper precondition for @scheme[withdraw] is that
``the balance of the given account is greater than or equal to the given (withdrawal) amount.'' ``the balance of the given account is greater than or equal to the given (withdrawal) amount.''
The postcondition is similar to the one for The postcondition is similar to the one for
@ctc-link["flat-named-contracts"]{@scheme[deposit]}: @ctc-link["flat-named-contracts"]{@scheme[deposit]}:
``the balance of the resulting account is larger than (or equal to) than the one of the ``the balance of the resulting account is larger than (or equal to) the one of the
given account.'' given account.''
You could of course also formulate a full-fledged correctness condition, namely, You could of course also formulate a full-fledged correctness condition, namely,
that the balance of the resulting account is equal to the balance of the given that the balance of the resulting account is equal to the balance of the given
@ -319,7 +319,7 @@ conditions we just discussed:
scheme scheme
(code:comment "section 1: the contract definitions") (code:comment "section 1: the contract definitions")
(define-struct account (balance)) (define-struct account (balance) #:mutable)
(define amount natural-number/c) (define amount natural-number/c)
(define msg> "account a with balance larger than ~a expected") (define msg> "account a with balance larger than ~a expected")