10 ms·

Adding kinds to Typed Racket makes it an even more attractive alternative to purer functional languages.

• epolanski 5y ago
  What makes racket less pure? Have been looking for a typed lisp to play with for quite some time and the choices have always been either racket or clojure.
  • reikonomusha 5y ago
    Coalton [0] is an option too if you're more into the Common Lisp style of programming. [0] https://coalton-lang.github.io/ https://coalton-lang.github.io/
  • KwisaksHaderach 5y ago
    https://shenlanguage.org https://shenlanguage.org has static typing.
  • piethesailorman 5y ago
    And maybe carp? https://github.com/carp-lang/Carp https://github.com/carp-lang/Carp
  • eyelidlessness 5y ago
    I’m not working with either so this is outside observation at this point, but my takeaway from both is that Clojure is more concerned with functional purity/isolating statefulness, and Racket is more focused on accommodating static types. There’s no reason those should be in conflict, but such is lisp, pick your compromise. Edit to add: I have worked with Clojure in production, I haven’t for several years, and probably won’t again unless something weird happens in my life.