[racket] fl vs. unsafe-fl

Greg,

 > The best thing about Typed Racket is that you can delegate that
> problem. Not only do you not need to write unsafe-fl+, you don't even
> need to write fl+. You can write +. Typed Racket will determine if +
> can safely be replaced with unsafe-fl+. (Assuming you typed things as
> Float a.k.a. Flonum, FlVector, &c.)

I agree with you; however, I think I am in an unlucky situation.
I actually have to write code that works with flonums or (optionally)
with extflonums. As Extflonums are not part of the numeric tower,
Typed Racket will not allow me to use "+" instead of "extfl+".

Regards,

Dmitry