4 ms·

How would you compare / contrast Chez and Racket? I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts. From what I can tell (and I may be wrong), some differences are:

How would you compare / contrast Chez and Racket? I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts. From what I can tell (and I may be wrong), some differences are: - Chez has parallel threads (that can run on multiple cores) - Racket seems to have some higher level concepts and more learning material - Racket has multiple "languages" and facilitates making your own; see: Beautiful Racket[0] - Chez is faster than Racket [0] https://beautifulracket.com/ https://beautifulracket.com/

mark_l_watson 8y ago
I like the fast 'bare bones' Chez implementation, but, I also appreciate the huge ecosystem around Racket.
- 4thaccount 8y ago
  Huge as in huge, or huge as in huge for a niche language?
  - darkpuma 8y ago
    Decide for yourself: https://pkgs.racket-lang.org/ https://pkgs.racket-lang.org/
    - 4thaccount 8y ago
      Did I read ~1000 packages? That's great for a small community and bigger than last time I checked a few years ago. It has a long way to go to get to CPAN or Nuget size though (captain obvious to the rescue :)). I think it demonstrates that the community is healthy though and I like the packages I saw by some brief browsing.
  - sevensor 8y ago
    The Racket standard library also has a lot of good stuff in it. There are many batteries included.
darkpuma 8y ago
Chez is a scheme, whereas Racket is basically a scheme but was renamed from PLT-Scheme because the authors/community felt it had strayed far enough from scheme that a renaming was a good idea. It's still basically scheme though. I mean, if you're coming from a scheme background the only thing that might trip you up in racket is cons cells are immutable. If you only have racket experience and try out [another] scheme, you might experience some culture shock when you start encountering stuff like let-values being in srfi-11 instead of racket/base. In my opinion, racket is generally a more pleasant experience. Virtually all of my personal/recreational projects are in racket these days.

mark_l_watson 8y ago

I like the fast 'bare bones' Chez implementation, but, I also appreciate the huge ecosystem around Racket.

4thaccount 8y ago
Huge as in huge, or huge as in huge for a niche language?
- darkpuma 8y ago
  Decide for yourself: https://pkgs.racket-lang.org/ https://pkgs.racket-lang.org/
  - 4thaccount 8y ago
    Did I read ~1000 packages? That's great for a small community and bigger than last time I checked a few years ago. It has a long way to go to get to CPAN or Nuget size though (captain obvious to the rescue :)). I think it demonstrates that the community is healthy though and I like the packages I saw by some brief browsing.
- sevensor 8y ago
  The Racket standard library also has a lot of good stuff in it. There are many batteries included.

darkpuma 8y ago

Chez is a scheme, whereas Racket is basically a scheme but was renamed from PLT-Scheme because the authors/community felt it had strayed far enough from scheme that a renaming was a good idea. It's still basically scheme though. I mean, if you're coming from a scheme background the only thing that might trip you up in racket is cons cells are immutable. If you only have racket experience and try out [another] scheme, you might experience some culture shock when you start encountering stuff like let-values being in srfi-11 instead of racket/base. In my opinion, racket is generally a more pleasant experience. Virtually all of my personal/recreational projects are in racket these days.