+test-slam-wa-wet comments
%+ expect-eq
!>(7)
-:(~(slam wa *worm) !>(add) !>([3 4]))
+:: +test-slam-wa-wet: does +slam:wa perform correct wet type inference?
+::
+:: Also test that the cache doesn't gain any new entries when given a
+:: sample of a previously seen type.
::
++ test-slam-wa-wet ^- tang
+ :: use the same .list-type for both calls
+ ::
+ :: Types defined on different lines won't be noun-equal, and so
+ :: won't test that the cache kicked in on the second entry.
::
=/ list-type=type -:!>(*(list @))
=| worm0=worm
