[racket] Question about round

Yesterday, Ryan Culpepper wrote:
> The pragmatic answer is you generally have to write
> 
>    (inexact->exact (round x))
> 
> which is annoying, but no one has yet bothered to add a standard
> library function for this, as far as I know.

[From the annoyed side, especially since that thing tends to come in
bunches which can make some quick code look much heavier than it is:]

Maybe it's time to add something for that?  `eround'?  (But even
`exact-round' would be better than the above.)

-- 
          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
                    http://barzilay.org/                   Maze is Life!