From 11927aea37e246671af1b06690cd05f79b500f0c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Robby Findler Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 14:18:31 -0600 Subject: [PATCH] respond to Matthias's comments --- .../scribblings/style/some-performance.scrbl | 12 ++++++------ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/pkgs/racket-doc/scribblings/style/some-performance.scrbl b/pkgs/racket-doc/scribblings/style/some-performance.scrbl index 3f0c307eae..304ef2e937 100644 --- a/pkgs/racket-doc/scribblings/style/some-performance.scrbl +++ b/pkgs/racket-doc/scribblings/style/some-performance.scrbl @@ -142,14 +142,14 @@ expands to many nested definitions and expressions every time it is used. @section{Unsafe: Beware} Racket provides a number of unsafe operations that behave -the same as other, safe operations when given valid inputs, -but eschewing checking for performance reasons and thus behave -unpredictably on invalid inputs. +like their related, safe variants but only when given valid inputs. +They differ in that they eschew checking for performance reasons +and thus behave unpredictably on invalid inputs. As one example, consider @racket[fx+] and @racket[unsafe-fx+]. -If you supply a non-@racket[fixnum?] to @racket[fx+], it raises -an error. If you supply a non-@racket[fixnum?] to @racket[unsafe-fx+], -it does not raise an error; instead it either returns a strange result +When @racket[fx+] is applied to a non-@racket[fixnum?], it raises +an error. In contrast, when @racket[unsafe-fx+] is applied to a non-@racket[fixnum?], +it does not raise an error. Instead it either returns a strange result that may violate invariants of the run-time system and may cause later operations (such as printing out the value) to crash Racket itself.