This didn't cause a problem before as it was likely just ignored by the C
function. According to Edwin the extra argument is a leftover from when this
was a pure scheme call.
Following a fairly detailed discussion on slack, the feeling is
generally that it's better to have a single interface. While precision
is nice, it doesn't appear to buy us anything here. If that turns out to
be wrong, or limiting somehow, we can revisit it later. Also:
- it's easier for backend authors if the type of IO operations is
slightly less restrictive. For example, if it's in HasIO, that limits
alternative implementations, which might be awkward for some
alternative back ends.
- it's one less extra detail to learn. This is minor, but there needs to
be a clear advantage if there's more detail to learn.
- It is difficult to think of an underlying type that can't have a Monad
instance (I have personally never encountered one - if they turns out
to exist, again, we can revisit!)
For the same behaviour as Idris 1, the primitive cast should return 0 if
the integer is out of bounds. (We should probably drop the Cast
implementation though, since ideally they won't be lossy in general, but
that's an issue for another time...)
All the tests pass in racket now, for me.
