3 ms·

I don't think parent's definition of "batteries included" is as narrow as you're suggesting, and I also think yours is too narrow. It's a claim that the standa

I don't think parent's definition of "batteries included" is as narrow as you're suggesting, and I also think yours is too narrow. It's a claim that the standard language distribution is sufficient to accomplish common goals of new users, without hunting down additional libraries or tools. As you say, the Python community coined the term, but their notion of its meaning perhaps slants a little too far towards their language distribution's strengths (standard library) and maybe suffers from lacunae towards their language distribution's weaknesses (a clearly-articulated way to create a GUI executable using the standard language distribution).

jnxx 5y ago
There are several dimensions to this in Racket. For one, it has a platform-independent GUI library as part of the standard library, which Python (like most other programming languages) hasn't. That makes it interesting for writing GUI applications or using it for experimental programs which might require )or benefit from) a GUI later. Racket has also a standardized package management, which is much easier to use than the different Python facilities. Racket has a much better performance compared to Python and that in turn makes it possible to implement many algorithms directly in Racket which would be a C extension in Python, which makes it more complex to use them. Another thing is that Racket, as a member of the Lisp family, has also a deep low-level support. For example, it supports multi-threading with both green threads and os-level threads, futures, synchronization, making it possible to write parallel algorithms, which isn't practically possible in standard Python.