b0cb1adda6
I didn't use the suggested fix by either @Syntacticlosure or @mfelleisen because there's another usage of `not-has?` which is correct already, so changing `not-has?` would break it. |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| 1-test.rkt | ||
| 1.rkt | ||
| 1b.rkt | ||
| 2-test.rkt | ||
| 2.rkt | ||
| 3-test.rkt | ||
| 3.rkt | ||
| 5-test.rkt | ||
| 5.rkt | ||
| ho-version1.rkt | ||
| ho-version2.rkt | ||
| ho-version2a.rkt | ||
| ho-version3.rkt | ||
| ho-version3a.rkt | ||
| ho-version3b.rkt | ||
| ho-version4.rkt | ||