On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 9:36 PM, Eli Barzilay <e...@barzilay.org> wrote: > An hour and a half ago, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: >> On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 8:14 PM, Eli Barzilay <e...@barzilay.org> wrote: >> > IMO, a better approach for disabling contracts is to have the >> > client decide whether it wants the contracted version or the plain >> > one -- which is a rough mirror of how unsafe operations are done >> > (with the choice being made by requiring one file or >> > another). Then, there could be a facility that associates a safe >> > identifier with an unsafe version, so you could write (unsafe foo) >> > -- which will be the unsafe operation for builtins that have one, >> > and in case of a contracted function it will be the uncontracted >> > one. >> >> This wouldn't work for the Typed Racket use case, where I want to flip >> one switch for contracts throughout the TR code base. > > (define-for-syntax contracts-on? #t) > > (define-syntax (switch stx) > (syntax-case stx () > [(_ id) (if contracts-on? #'id #'(unsafe id))]))
But now I have to change all the places that use these identifiers. The "turn on and off internal contracts" and "give me unchecked access to this library" use cases are genuinely different. -- sam th sa...@ccs.neu.edu _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
