3 ms·

I tried using racket to do something useful and totally failed each time. Even if you are a single programmer making some kind of prototype I think we have gott

I tried using racket to do something useful and totally failed each time. Even if you are a single programmer making some kind of prototype I think we have gotten beyond the stage of picking a small language. Also, doing a rewrite into an Ml style language is really strange when they should probably be trying to become more competitive with other languages by building more batteries for it or fixing fundamental problems that were outlined here.

serf 3y ago
>Even if you are a single programmer making some kind of prototype I think we have gotten beyond the stage of picking a small language. in what world does racket get classified as a 'small language'? it was one of the originals who focused on the 'batteries included' aspect for the sake of being more applicable in education.
priime0 3y ago
> Also, doing a rewrite into an Ml style language is really strange when they should probably be trying to become more competitive with other languages by building more batteries for it or fixing fundamental problems that were outlined here. From what I know, Rhombus and Racket are parallel, mutually-beneficial projects. The development of Rhombus has contributed smaller features into Racket, while showcasing Racket's capability for language development. Rhombus is, in a sense, filling in gaps that Racket may be missing.