4 ms·
I think some are bristling that Racket is the way to go, but Typed Racket is certainly a good way to go. https://docs.racket-lang.org/ts-guide/ https://docs.rac
by peatmoss 8y ago
I think some are bristling that Racket is the way to go, but Typed Racket is certainly a good way to go. https://docs.racket-lang.org/ts-guide/ https://docs.racket-lang.org/ts-guide/
You can start without types and later convert parts of your code to typed without too much headache.
But, as the GP has mentioned, SBCL allows you to add type annotations which is similar in spirit to the idea of progressively adding types.
Even as a Racket fan (and Racket’s performance is pretty good), I covet the blazing performance of SBCL, so the calculus is not cut and dry.
- sevensor 8y agoInteresting stuff is happening performance-wise. I have my eye on both Racket-on-Chez and pycket.
- peatmoss 8y agoRacket-on-Chez may eventually result in a better performing Racket, but SBCL is still going to be a hard target to match. That said, Racket on Chez means more of Racket is getting written in Racket. In turn, I suppose Racket-on-SBCL is not outside the realm of possibility. In general, it would be cool if Racket ran in more places.