Unfortunately, I think that strategy would incur substantial overhead for things like serialization of large arrays.
Sam On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Matthias Felleisen <matth...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: > > On Jul 23, 2014, at 11:10 AM, Neil Toronto <neil.toro...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 07/16/2014 10:25 AM, Berthold Bäuml wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> will there be serialization support for math/array and math/matrix in the >>> near future? As far as I understand in principle it should be possible at >>> leas in a straight forward way as there are already the routines >>> array->list and list->array. >> >> Sorry it's taken so long to reply. Part of the problem is that >> `racket/serialize` isn't typed: >> >> #lang typed/racket >> >> > (require racket/serialize) >> > serialize >> Type Checker: missing type for identifier; >> consider using `require/typed' to import it >> identifier: serialize >> from module: racket/serialize in: serialize >> >> >> This and the fact that the array struct types are declared in Typed Racket >> makes adding serialization tricky at best. Also, it would only work in >> untyped Racket. >> >> Generally, deserializing is hard to make type-safe, and nobody has taken it >> up yet for Typed Racket. Occurrence typing should help, but would require >> `deserialize` to take a predicate argument (like the second argument to >> `list*->array`), which it currently doesn't do. > > > Lucky us. I often leave the I/O parts of my programs untyped (I write either > highly imprecise unchecked signatures or I don't provide types). > ____________________ > Racket Users list: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/users ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
