4 ms·

I’m still not sure what you mean by “safe.” Are you worried about Racket becoming unmaintained? Racket itself is written on top of Chez Scheme, so does that sa

• klibertp 4y ago
  > I’m still not sure what you mean by “safe.” Probably means "portable". If I'm reading it correctly, they want to be able to run Racket programs using a portability layer instead of writing a full interpreter. That would be something like using WINE vs. VirtualBox running Windows inside. > Are you worried about Racket becoming unmaintained? This is quite understandable concern, and even if it doesn't happen, having an "exit strategy" prepared is not a bad thing. > Racket itself is written on top of Chez Scheme, so does that satisfy your safety condition? Right, I forgot about it! After the rewrite/porting to CS Racket should have become easier to port to further platforms. I think much of Racket's reader and macro-expander was rewritten in pure Scheme. @MichaelBurge - take a look at the blog[1] and follow links from there[2]. Racket was ported from a custom JIT-capable implementation to Chez Scheme. It took 4-5 years, but it was finished last year. The performance is now at the same level it was before, but a lot of C code is now written in Scheme. [1] https://blog.racket-lang.org/2020/02/racket-on-chez-status.html https://blog.racket-lang.org/2020/02/racket-on-chez-status.h... [2] migration done post: https://blog.racket-lang.org/2021/01/racket-status.html https://blog.racket-lang.org/2021/01/racket-status.html