Matthew Flatt writes: > Personally, while my contributions to Chez Scheme so far have been > modest, I have already factored into my costs the worst-case scenario > of fully maintaining Chez Scheme as used by Racket. Even if that > happens, it still looks like a good deal in the long run.
That's nice to hear (though I hope it doesn't need to happen). Part of the reason I haven't been too worried is that in conversations with you it's sounded like the goal of Racket-on-Chez has also been to allow for *multiple* backends (eg, I still think a Guile backend would be interesting some day). That seems like it reduces the risk substantially. -- 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.
