3 ms·
Curious how people who use this find it compares to an environment like Racket?
by opnitro 7y ago
Curious how people who use this find it compares to an environment like Racket?
- ashton314 7y agoI’d like to ask the same. Most PL research is done with Racket; I imagine this might have a steep uphill battle if it wants to gain traction. But maybe it’s target application is sufficiently specialized… ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- seanmcdirmid 7y ago> Most PL research is done with Racket A lot of PL research is done with Racket, but I doubt it is even close to being most, or even more than 1 or 2%. As for Rascal vs Racket, they really are going after different language engineering niches.
- j88439h84 7y agoHow would you describe the distribution of languages used in PL research?
- seanmcdirmid 7y agoVery diverse.
- Jaxan 7y agoI don't really know Racket. But from what i've seen, it's mostly sold as a language to create new languages in. Rascal on the other was designed to analyse existing languages. They wanted to have a single framework to analyse both Java and C++ for example. The goal was to be able to easily add new syntax and reuse semantic analysis, I believe.
- kokx 7y agoI have programmed in both Rascal and Racket (for university courses). I really prefer Racket. Though most of that might be because Rascal isn't really polished for mainstream usage. Rascal doesn't have a lot of good error messages at the moment (the most common error message you might see, is CallFailed, with just the bare minimum of information where it occured). Another issue is how to run Rascal. Currently, you can only install it as an Eclipse plugin, and that seems to be the only way to run it. Edit: I see that last statement is false. There is a commandline REPL. But I do not know if it works well.