3 ms·
I would like to see wider adoption of Racket. I spent six weeks earlier this year evaluating and comparing Racket, LispWorks Common Lisp, and Swift for an appli
by mark_l_watson 6y ago
I would like to see wider adoption of Racket. I spent six weeks earlier this year evaluating and comparing Racket, LispWorks Common Lisp, and Swift for an application [1] I am working on. I ended up not choosing Racket, but it was a very close decision.
As a modern Lisp, Racket really has it all: vibrant user and dev community, portable GUI support, easy to make standalone applications, and great libraries.
[1] http://knowledgegraphnavigator.com/ http://knowledgegraphnavigator.com/
- tjr 6y agoCan you share, what was the deciding factor against Racket?
- 147 6y agoNot OP but for me, I wanted to write http server applications and I was put off by having to specify the http response status messages and timestamps. I'm wondering why something slightly higher level isn't built into the standard lib.
- Bogdanp 6y agoYou don’t have to specify those things yourself unless you want to manually construct a response struct. There are helpers like response/xexpr and response/output that construct responses for you. This article might help: https://defn.io/2020/02/12/racket-web-server-guide/ https://defn.io/2020/02/12/racket-web-server-guide/
- samth 6y agoThese days, response status messages are automatically inferred: https://docs.racket-lang.org/web-server/http.html?q=response%2Fxexpr#%28def._%28%28lib._web-server%2Fhttp%2Fresponse-structs..rkt%29._response%2Ffull%29%29 https://docs.racket-lang.org/web-server/http.html?q=response...
- 147 6y agoThanks! I’m gonna give racket another spin now.