> On Sep 22, 2016, at 9:39 PM, Jay McCarthy <jay.mccar...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If I knew how, I'd do unsafe-in, but I just know how to fake a typed context. 
> The whole point is to use the optimizer so libraries like math are usable. 

Libraries like math/array would still be usable without the optimizer. 

What you really want is a version of require (or a require transformer) that 
would allow untyped code to *selectively* unsafely require typed code. I would 
want to import as few things unsafely as possible.

It's impossible to choose what to be unsafe about if it's an all-or-nothing 
imperative flag like that.

> On Friday, September 23, 2016, Leif Andersen <l...@leifandersen.net 
> <mailto:l...@leifandersen.net>> wrote:
> Umm...if you're going to do this, why is it imperative, and not a require 
> transformer?
> Also, I kind of agree with Matthias here...sigh. :'( Like, as far as I can 
> tell, this is even worse then typed/racket/unsafe, as the optimizer is still 
> run. O_o

Also, with typed/racket/unsafe the optimizer *is* still run, so that's not any 
better *unless* you selectively choose what you want to be unsafe.

This is worse, but not because of the optimizer; because of the all-or-nothing 

Alex Knauth

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to