5 ms·

I really wish the Racket team would write a book on Racket’s language making capabilities, or create a MOOC. I attended Racket School 2019, and it was awesome.

by bmitc 6y ago

I really wish the Racket team would write a book on Racket’s language making capabilities, or create a MOOC. I attended Racket School 2019, and it was awesome. The material was well put together and walked us through macros to #langs. But the only published material to walk a person through macros and building languages are Fear of Macros and Beautiful Racket. I have many ideas for little DSLs in Racket, but I am too slow and am slogging my way through learning how to create them.

Decabytes 6y ago
I feel exactly the same way. Racket considers this one of it’s killer features so they should be plastering it all across the Internet.
ywei3410 6y ago
Hi, What type of material would you like to see? What parts of the API are you finding difficult?
disconcision 6y ago
Agreed that a book would be great, but worth mentioning that the course page for racketschool 2019 itself now provides the current best intro to syntax/parse and DSL making in racket: https://school.racket-lang.org/2019/plan/ https://school.racket-lang.org/2019/plan/
- bmitc 6y ago
  That’s a good resource for sure, so thanks for pointing people there. Basically, it would be great to take that year’s Racket School and turn it into an expanded and more streamlined work.
rscho 6y ago
There's this https://youtu.be/WQGh_NemRy4 https://youtu.be/WQGh_NemRy4 Pretty basic, but it helped me a bit.
yaleL 6y ago
I think using Racket should be avoided because of its problematic community. I've had disgusting experiences interacting with people from Racket community in the past, but so far I thought I was the only one. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem that way. Recently, a computer Scientist Leandro Facchinetti described in his video his ugly experiences with top people in Racket community. The experience was such that he completely gave up his PHD and the use of Racket forever. You can view the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wY7FBtr7_c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wY7FBtr7_c In the video Leandro Facchinetti says: Speaking of people, it's very sad that I had same bad experiences with some people in the Racket community, especially the people up top because they are the kind of people who are smart and they know about it and they will not lose a chance to tell you. I'll give you some examples: I was at the Racket conference having dinner with one of the creators of the language and some other attendees and the creator of the language had some very good points about higher education and how it is kind of a scam in the U.S. but to prove his point he decided some questions to the waiter that were kind of uncomfortable and everyone at the table kind of cringed. Of course, the waiter was gratious about it but still... As another example, I was talking to another one of the creators of the language and he called one of my collaborators a doofus and the educators at my university, which used to be John Hopkins University, a bunch of donkeys. I understand that he had some points to make about how educators work but this is not the way you make them, right? It comes to a point that when I was talking to the students of these people, they're kind of afraid of talking to their advisors and I must admit that spending time with these people is one of the reasons why I decided to drop out of the PHD and leave academia all together, because if that's how it looks like to be successful in these communities I think I prefer to try to be successful somewhere else.
- rscho 6y ago
  Seriously, do you have an email alert to come shit on racket with the same comment on HN with a new username every time? :-D You must have had a really, really bad experience.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - 6y ago
Buttons840 6y ago
What do you think of https://beautifulracket.com/ https://beautifulracket.com/ ? Isn't it exactly what you're asking for? You seem to say, I wish there was a book on X, but there is only this book on X. What more do you want? I don't mean that rhetorically, what additional things would you like to see covered?
- Decabytes 6y ago
  I've worked through Beautiful Racket before, though it's been awhile. I think my main issues are 1. You need to install the Beautiful Racket package, which makes the starting point for creating the languages easier, but is not representative of how it's used in the Racket Docs (not that I'm saying the Racket docs have a better intro) 2. Uses Brain Fuck. It feels like there has to be a language that fits in between unintelligible but easy to parse, and extremely verbose and complex. (It's probably scheme but that's taken in this context) And sometimes I just need to see the same problem from a few different angles before it will stick. That's why Greg's Fear of Macros wasn't able to take me all the way to a comfortable place with macros. I think BR is a great book, and I definitely learned a lot from it, I'll probably go back to it at some point to see if I can get it to click. I've been on a Racket kick recently so I've got a decent amount of hours into the language. Also I'm always struck with a feeling when I'm coding in Racket where I go "Would a dsl be good here?" I know Racket makes it easy but I don't even know about what makes a good dsl, or how certain dsls might be harder than other based on the way Racket does L.O.P. Again this might just be from inexperience. Lastly I would also like to see some examples of typed languages being created using typed Racket. I know there is the Turnstile library, but from my understanding it makes it easier to created typed languages, but that the possibility was there before. I'd rather learn the hard unabstracted way first before moving to using a library.
- nextos 6y ago
  Beautiful Racket is a really nice book. I wish there was a long tutorial on DSLs + static analysis, preferably abstract interpretation. Develop a DSL that is a bit beyond a toy example, and show how to carry out static analysis. All in one place. I think this would help a lot towards making the goal of Racket, language-oriented design, more popular.
iainctduncan 6y ago
It is certainly true that Racket has a ridiculously low number of books on it that aren't textbooks. It's a real pity. I like Racket a lot, but there is so little focus on use outside of academia that I don't hold my breath on it becoming a production appropriate tool for typical business software.
- spdegabrielle 6y ago
  It’s growing; Racket Programming the Fun Way An introduction to the Racket functional programming language and DrRacket development environment to explore topics in mathematics (mostly recreational) and computer science. https://nostarch.com/racket-programming-fun-way https://nostarch.com/racket-programming-fun-way
- spdegabrielle 6y ago
  More books at https://racket-lang.org/books.html https://racket-lang.org/books.html
ssivark 6y ago
If you feel like sharing the ideas, I’m sure many people would be interested in seeing potential example applications where this (abstract and somewhat uncommon, in other languages) capability can be put to good use.
- srcreigh 6y ago
  You can go as complex as your own type system. One type system was added to Racket called Typed Racket. No new features were needed in the language or tooling, they just used Racket macros to build a Racket with static compiler errors which integrates with the IDE. Two similar cases. One is Typescript. That's a new language with different syntax, a new compiler which targets JS. It also provides its own tooling for IDEs. Another is Python. Over time there were PEPs to add syntax for type hints, and now type systems are being added to the language. When Racket did this, they were able to do it in Racket without adding more features to the compiler or IDE. There's built in support for static analysis, compiler errors, editor integration. Not to mention a way to organize all the information you need to do type checking in the compile steps, and make that information accessible in the right places. The new type safe Racket was built using plain ol Racket. There's a reasonably accessible paper about this here: https://www2.ccs.neu.edu/racket/pubs/scheme2007-ctf.pdf https://www2.ccs.neu.edu/racket/pubs/scheme2007-ctf.pdf So here are some of my ideas: 1. Play around with static analysis checks. I want to rebuild Typescript style structural inference to Racket. I like how TS is unsound (has no runtime performance penalty for mixing untyped code), and is easily disabled via any if it's in the way. I love the focus on great error messages. Maybe one day I will contribute to Typed Racket :) Making your own compiler error appear in Racket is just 5 lines of code. https://gist.github.com/srcreigh/a0a087adc26e15af0160e8866d48cd1c https://gist.github.com/srcreigh/a0a087adc26e15af0160e8866d4... 2. New syntax for creating structs. Racket had structs that are initialized like (point 1 2). What if you want keyword syntax ie (point #:x 1 #:y 2)? What if you want that to work with match too? Do you want a JS-style syntax such as (point #:x #:y 2) which pulls in x as an identifier? You can do all this! The rebellion library is pretty awesome in this regard [1], with some sample usage of it in a script here [2]. [1]: https://docs.racket-lang.org/rebellion/Data_Types.html https://docs.racket-lang.org/rebellion/Data_Types.html [2]: https://github.com/srcreigh/shift-remapper/blob/main/generate.rkt https://github.com/srcreigh/shift-remapper/blob/main/generat...
brooksbp 6y ago
What about "Semantics Engineering with PLT Redex"?

by bmitc 6y ago

Decabytes 6y ago

I feel exactly the same way. Racket considers this one of it’s killer features so they should be plastering it all across the Internet.

ywei3410 6y ago

Hi, What type of material would you like to see? What parts of the API are you finding difficult?

disconcision 6y ago

Agreed that a book would be great, but worth mentioning that the course page for racketschool 2019 itself now provides the current best intro to syntax/parse and DSL making in racket: https://school.racket-lang.org/2019/plan/ https://school.racket-lang.org/2019/plan/

bmitc 6y ago
That’s a good resource for sure, so thanks for pointing people there. Basically, it would be great to take that year’s Racket School and turn it into an expanded and more streamlined work.

rscho 6y ago

There's this https://youtu.be/WQGh_NemRy4 https://youtu.be/WQGh_NemRy4 Pretty basic, but it helped me a bit.

yaleL 6y ago

I think using Racket should be avoided because of its problematic community. I've had disgusting experiences interacting with people from Racket community in the past, but so far I thought I was the only one. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem that way. Recently, a computer Scientist Leandro Facchinetti described in his video his ugly experiences with top people in Racket community. The experience was such that he completely gave up his PHD and the use of Racket forever. You can view the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wY7FBtr7_c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wY7FBtr7_c In the video Leandro Facchinetti says: Speaking of people, it's very sad that I had same bad experiences with some people in the Racket community, especially the people up top because they are the kind of people who are smart and they know about it and they will not lose a chance to tell you. I'll give you some examples: I was at the Racket conference having dinner with one of the creators of the language and some other attendees and the creator of the language had some very good points about higher education and how it is kind of a scam in the U.S. but to prove his point he decided some questions to the waiter that were kind of uncomfortable and everyone at the table kind of cringed. Of course, the waiter was gratious about it but still... As another example, I was talking to another one of the creators of the language and he called one of my collaborators a doofus and the educators at my university, which used to be John Hopkins University, a bunch of donkeys. I understand that he had some points to make about how educators work but this is not the way you make them, right? It comes to a point that when I was talking to the students of these people, they're kind of afraid of talking to their advisors and I must admit that spending time with these people is one of the reasons why I decided to drop out of the PHD and leave academia all together, because if that's how it looks like to be successful in these communities I think I prefer to try to be successful somewhere else.

rscho 6y ago
Seriously, do you have an email alert to come shit on racket with the same comment on HN with a new username every time? :-D You must have had a really, really bad experience.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- 6y ago

Buttons840 6y ago

What do you think of https://beautifulracket.com/ https://beautifulracket.com/ ? Isn't it exactly what you're asking for? You seem to say, I wish there was a book on X, but there is only this book on X. What more do you want? I don't mean that rhetorically, what additional things would you like to see covered?

Decabytes 6y ago
I've worked through Beautiful Racket before, though it's been awhile. I think my main issues are 1. You need to install the Beautiful Racket package, which makes the starting point for creating the languages easier, but is not representative of how it's used in the Racket Docs (not that I'm saying the Racket docs have a better intro) 2. Uses Brain Fuck. It feels like there has to be a language that fits in between unintelligible but easy to parse, and extremely verbose and complex. (It's probably scheme but that's taken in this context) And sometimes I just need to see the same problem from a few different angles before it will stick. That's why Greg's Fear of Macros wasn't able to take me all the way to a comfortable place with macros. I think BR is a great book, and I definitely learned a lot from it, I'll probably go back to it at some point to see if I can get it to click. I've been on a Racket kick recently so I've got a decent amount of hours into the language. Also I'm always struck with a feeling when I'm coding in Racket where I go "Would a dsl be good here?" I know Racket makes it easy but I don't even know about what makes a good dsl, or how certain dsls might be harder than other based on the way Racket does L.O.P. Again this might just be from inexperience. Lastly I would also like to see some examples of typed languages being created using typed Racket. I know there is the Turnstile library, but from my understanding it makes it easier to created typed languages, but that the possibility was there before. I'd rather learn the hard unabstracted way first before moving to using a library.
nextos 6y ago
Beautiful Racket is a really nice book. I wish there was a long tutorial on DSLs + static analysis, preferably abstract interpretation. Develop a DSL that is a bit beyond a toy example, and show how to carry out static analysis. All in one place. I think this would help a lot towards making the goal of Racket, language-oriented design, more popular.

iainctduncan 6y ago

It is certainly true that Racket has a ridiculously low number of books on it that aren't textbooks. It's a real pity. I like Racket a lot, but there is so little focus on use outside of academia that I don't hold my breath on it becoming a production appropriate tool for typical business software.

spdegabrielle 6y ago
It’s growing; Racket Programming the Fun Way An introduction to the Racket functional programming language and DrRacket development environment to explore topics in mathematics (mostly recreational) and computer science. https://nostarch.com/racket-programming-fun-way https://nostarch.com/racket-programming-fun-way
spdegabrielle 6y ago
More books at https://racket-lang.org/books.html https://racket-lang.org/books.html

ssivark 6y ago

If you feel like sharing the ideas, I’m sure many people would be interested in seeing potential example applications where this (abstract and somewhat uncommon, in other languages) capability can be put to good use.

srcreigh 6y ago
You can go as complex as your own type system. One type system was added to Racket called Typed Racket. No new features were needed in the language or tooling, they just used Racket macros to build a Racket with static compiler errors which integrates with the IDE. Two similar cases. One is Typescript. That's a new language with different syntax, a new compiler which targets JS. It also provides its own tooling for IDEs. Another is Python. Over time there were PEPs to add syntax for type hints, and now type systems are being added to the language. When Racket did this, they were able to do it in Racket without adding more features to the compiler or IDE. There's built in support for static analysis, compiler errors, editor integration. Not to mention a way to organize all the information you need to do type checking in the compile steps, and make that information accessible in the right places. The new type safe Racket was built using plain ol Racket. There's a reasonably accessible paper about this here: https://www2.ccs.neu.edu/racket/pubs/scheme2007-ctf.pdf https://www2.ccs.neu.edu/racket/pubs/scheme2007-ctf.pdf So here are some of my ideas: 1. Play around with static analysis checks. I want to rebuild Typescript style structural inference to Racket. I like how TS is unsound (has no runtime performance penalty for mixing untyped code), and is easily disabled via any if it's in the way. I love the focus on great error messages. Maybe one day I will contribute to Typed Racket :) Making your own compiler error appear in Racket is just 5 lines of code. https://gist.github.com/srcreigh/a0a087adc26e15af0160e8866d48cd1c https://gist.github.com/srcreigh/a0a087adc26e15af0160e8866d4... 2. New syntax for creating structs. Racket had structs that are initialized like (point 1 2). What if you want keyword syntax ie (point #:x 1 #:y 2)? What if you want that to work with match too? Do you want a JS-style syntax such as (point #:x #:y 2) which pulls in x as an identifier? You can do all this! The rebellion library is pretty awesome in this regard [1], with some sample usage of it in a script here [2]. [1]: https://docs.racket-lang.org/rebellion/Data_Types.html https://docs.racket-lang.org/rebellion/Data_Types.html [2]: https://github.com/srcreigh/shift-remapper/blob/main/generate.rkt https://github.com/srcreigh/shift-remapper/blob/main/generat...

brooksbp 6y ago

What about "Semantics Engineering with PLT Redex"?