> On Sep 22, 2016, at 9:39 PM, Jay McCarthy <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> 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 part. 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 [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
