Racket tends to be geared to writing lispy things because of the heavy reliance of the syntax parsing and macro transformation on s-expressions, so most/all bei

Racket tends to be geared to writing lispy things because of the heavy reliance of the syntax parsing and macro transformation on s-expressions, so most/all being variants of lisp makes sense. Writing non-sexp languages in Racket tends to take a lot more work that's not batteries included. It also has an incredibly powerful inheritance system. In 3-5 lines I can inherit all the functionality from Racket and then add, modify, or delete any part I like. Reminder, I can do all this from the compile time level, not the runtime level. I can change something as basic as how you define functions with just a few lines of code while still getting everything else. Basically, I can easily write Racket+X or Racket with modified Y or Racket without Z and make it it's own entire language with very minimal effort. A lot of this occurs because of Racket's insanely good macro system. You can also use these tools in libraries/packages and still get the compile time control while the language is still officially Racket.