Benefits of unsafe code are ambiguously stated

[Copilot]

Working on issue #20665 to clarify that unsafe code itself doesn't provide performance benefits - it enables writing different algorithms that may be faster.

Plan:

• Identify the problematic statement in /docs/csharp/language-reference/unsafe-code.md line 25
• Understand the issue: current wording "unsafe code can increase performance by removing array bounds checks" is ambiguous
• Update the wording to clarify that unsafe code enables writing different algorithms, not automatic performance gains
• Verify the change maintains accuracy and clarity
• Test that the documentation still renders correctly

Change made:

- In some cases, unsafe code can increase an application's performance by removing array bounds checks.
+ Unsafe code enables algorithms that can potentially increase an application's performance by using pointers to avoid array bounds checks.

Why this addresses the issue:

• "enables algorithms" - clarifies that unsafe code provides capabilities, not automatic performance
• "by using pointers to avoid" - specifically explains how performance is achieved through pointer usage
• Removes ambiguous "removing" language that suggested automatic optimization
• Makes clear that you need to write different algorithms using pointers for performance benefits

The change is minimal and surgical, addressing only the ambiguous statement identified in the issue.

Fixes #20665.

---

💬 Share your feedback on Copilot coding agent for the chance to win a $200 gift card! Click here to start the survey.

---

Internal previews

📄 File	🔗 Preview link
docs/csharp/language-reference/unsafe-code.md	docs/csharp/language-reference/unsafe-code

[BillWagner]

This LGTM. It's ready for final review

[BillWagner]

@copilot can you finish any further changes here?

[Copilot]

@copilot can you finish any further changes here?

Yes, I've completed the final remaining task from the plan. I validated that the documentation renders correctly using markdownlint-cli2 (0 errors) and markdown-link-check (valid structure). The change is ready for final review.

[BillWagner]

@IEvangelist PTAL