On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 8:10 PM, Saša Janiška <g...@atmarama.com> wrote:
> Neil Van Dyke <n...@neilvandyke.org> writes: > > > Being non-mainstream for practitioners, Racket is most popular with > > people who have the freedom to choose any tools they want, not forced > > into a mainstream set of options. Most often this means individual > > alpha techies, researchers, etc. > > That's true, but still wonder why not more hobbyist are using it. > AFAIK, when other developers(even users in this maillist) mention Racket, they are talking about Scheme which is thought not designed for practitioners. When they talk about the real world application of Racket, they only know the Hacker News which is made in old scheme. Racket has lots of great tools that you named above, however, hobbyists may not buy it. Say, every developer does not like to write docs while hating other developers who do not write docs. Perhaps the most important thing is that the idea of "Embedding executable/testing code in the docs" is beyond their practice (even beyond the Literate Programming). I just made myself an opportunity to work as a full stack Racket developer four months ago. This is also a good chance to show others that Racket is powerful or at least not so bad even in their concerns (the roadmap of full spectrum). -- 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.
