I mostly like the text navigation features I have in Emacs. I also like that I can run a shell inside Emacs and manage multiple buffers easily. Installing different color themes is easy too, while in DrRacket I would probably have to configure the colors myself (I might be wrong though, not sure if there isn't an easy way to get many themes into DrRacket).
I've never used DrRacket for a long time. Even the fancy arrows where something comes from when you hover it with the mouse cursor did not do much for me, because I either already knew where it came from, because I wrote the code myself, or because the arrow would come from something out of visible area. This also happens when you have an error and it tries to help you with the arrows. If it was somehow more usable (I have no idea how), maybe it would do something for me too. What I used DrRacket for once were the examples for multi-threading and multi-processing in the Racket guide. It has nice visualization for this stuff, which I cannot get easily from Emacs. When I need more of a backtrace, I simply run my programs with: `racket -l errortrace -t myfile.rkt` (that is a lowercase L, not an uppercase i) Memory limits can be easily added to a program as well with the following code: ~~~ (define (Mb-to-B n) (* n 1024 1024)) (define MAX-BYTES (Mb-to-B 128)) (custodian-limit-memory (current-custodian) MAX-BYTES) ~~~ So I am usually not missing anything DrRacket would give me. Maybe if I was using more languages or more of the debugging tooling it offers I would use DrRacket more often. One thing I liked was the integrated package manager. But that too can be handled easily with the `raco`. -- 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.
