Hello all,
a short followup on the issue.
I opened a PR[1] and Sam raised an interesting question:
(require (filtered-in
(λ (name)
(and (regexp-match #rx"^unsafe-fx" name)
(regexp-replace #rx"unsafe-" name "")))
racket/unsafe/ops))
Hi,
On 15. 12. 19 2:57, Jack Firth wrote:
> I think that documentation fix is a good idea.
I'll submit a PR to appropriate repository later on.
> More broadly, it seems awkward that all of the unsafe ops for
> different data types are combined together into a single module. I
> would instead
Unsafe operations are usually defined externally, like in a C extension,
where safety is harder to guarantee and module hierarchies are less
idiomatic. The "unsafe" moniker is a standard warning that you are
responsible for understanding the underlying implementation and calling
into it
I think that documentation fix is a good idea. More broadly, it seems
awkward that all of the unsafe ops for different data types are combined
together into a single module. I would instead expect there to be modules
like racket/fixnum/unsafe, racket/struct/unsafe, racket/vector/unsafe, etc.
4 matches
Mail list logo
