diff --git a/racket/collects/unstable/struct.rkt b/racket/collects/unstable/struct.rkt
deleted file mode 100644
index 100739b852..0000000000
--- a/racket/collects/unstable/struct.rkt
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,52 +0,0 @@
-#lang racket/base
-;; owner: ryanc
-(require (for-syntax racket/base
-                     racket/struct-info)
-         racket/struct)
-(provide make
-         struct->list
-         (for-syntax get-struct-info))
-
-;; get-struct-info : identifier stx -> struct-info-list
-(define-for-syntax (get-struct-info id ctx)
-  (define (bad-struct-name x)
-    (raise-syntax-error #f "expected struct name" ctx x))
-  (unless (identifier? id)
-    (bad-struct-name id))
-  (let ([value (syntax-local-value id (lambda () #f))])
-    (unless (struct-info? value)
-      (bad-struct-name id))
-    (extract-struct-info value)))
-
-;; (make struct-name field-expr ...)
-;; Checks that correct number of fields given.
-(define-syntax (make stx)
-  (syntax-case stx ()
-    [(make S expr ...)
-     (let ()
-       (define info (get-struct-info #'S stx))
-       (define constructor (list-ref info 1))
-       (define accessors (list-ref info 3))
-       (unless (identifier? #'constructor)
-         (raise-syntax-error #f "constructor not available for struct" stx #'S))
-       (unless (andmap identifier? accessors)
-         (raise-syntax-error #f "incomplete info for struct type" stx #'S))
-       (let ([num-slots (length accessors)]
-             [num-provided (length (syntax->list #'(expr ...)))])
-         (unless (= num-provided num-slots)
-           (raise-syntax-error
-            #f
-            (format "wrong number of arguments for struct ~s (expected ~s, got ~s)"
-                    (syntax-e #'S)
-                    num-slots
-                    num-provided)
-            stx)))
-       (with-syntax ([constructor constructor])
-         (syntax-property #'(constructor expr ...)
-                          'disappeared-use
-                          #'S)))]))
-;; Eli: You give a good point for this, but I'd prefer if the optimizer would
-;;   detect these, so you'd get the same warnings for constructors too when you
-;;   use `-W warning'.  (And then, if you really want these things to be
-;;   errors, then perhaps something at the racket level should make it throw
-;;   errors instead of warnings.)