First of all, the first field I am interested in Computer Science can reasonably marked as Programming Language itself.
Before I chose Racket, I used C and Java/ActionScript at work. now Racket is the major one (among all languages not only lisp dialects) in my life. Many people choose Clojure for the season of taking advantages of Java Platform. I do not judge their choices, but for me, I prefer working with c shared libraries. Actually this is the common sense for Racketers who are working on real life applications. and this is also the most part that less productivity. To be honest and to tell the truth, if Racket can be marked as a full stack language, lots of the facilities are just at the beginning stage, the so called "out of box with just basic equipments". But you might have to implement you own frameworks when you want to build a more complex system (GUI, Web, Testing, Visualizing and so on), the good news is that the community is very kind and always ready to help you in a professional way. To my poor knowledge of functional language communities. Lots of people are drinking in exploring the potential abilities of the languages, and as simple but too powerful as lisp families are, you can always find lots of solutions to solve one problem (just like mainstream languages). For me, this is the most thing that makes me headache, I don't like choosing, especially to choose among lots of buggy implementations. That might be the curse of lisp families as well as haskell. But Racket makes me feel comfortable, you know I do not even use the old package system. On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 5:11 AM, Sayth Renshaw <flebber.c...@gmail.com> wrote: > I received a direct reply from Doug. > If you're strictly comparing Racket to other Lisp dialects, I would say > there is never any reason to go to a different Lisp dialect. The main > exception would be if there is some specific, existing capability in a > different language that you require. But, that is not a dialect issue. > > I regularly use Racket for complex analysis tasks. The mathematic and > plotting capabilities available are superior (in my opinion) to other > dialects. > > Your mileage may vary. > > Doug Williams > > > Along those lines though but not necessarily limited to lisp dialects, > where would racket become less productive. That is you would switch to > another language to complete? > > Sayth > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Racket Users" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
