>For example: I was reading the SICP and using racket that looks like an interesting runtime nowadays. Turns out that a while a go the dev team made cons immuta

>For example: I was reading the SICP and using racket that looks like an interesting runtime nowadays. Turns out that a while a go the dev team made cons immutable and that's okay I guess but it broke (at least for me) the experience of reading SICP because I now have to pause and learn this quirk of this specific lisp implementation. I'm pretty sure that you're supposed to choose the correct language in Dr. Racket if you want mutable cons semantics (such that you're using R5RS and not Racket).