The nice thing about Racket is the way you can write different parts of your program in different Racket languages. So you can write some pieces in Typed Racket, and others in Lazy Racket, and others in standard Racket.
It is my understanding that Typed Racket programs do not run any faster than their dynamically-typed counterparts, and in fact commonly run slower because there are a lot of additional runtime checks that must be inserted to handle various types of unsafe calls that can cross module boundaries or be executed at the REPL. Typed Racket is purely about safety, not about speed. My guess is that the Clojure community would have little interest in any version of static typing that did not provide performance benefits. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
