On Wednesday, August 14, 2019 at 10:39:52 AM UTC-4, Matthew Flatt wrote:
>
> The Racket project leadership [see signature at end] hasn't had a
> chance to meet and discuss since RacketCon. When it does meet, we
> should be able to offer a plan for both the future development of
> Racket and the
The Racket project leadership [see signature at end] hasn't had a
chance to meet and discuss since RacketCon. When it does meet, we
should be able to offer a plan for both the future development of
Racket and the process of involving everyone in that development.
Let's start by reminding everyone
понедельник, 12 августа 2019 г., 15:49:45 UTC+3 пользователь Robby Findler
написал:
>
>
> As for adopting-new-syntax vs backwards-compatibility, does it help if
> I were to tell you that anything new will always be "opt in", in the
> sense that existing programs will continue to work completely
I do feel different concerns and not even sure about some of them, so I
will try to explain myself if this is in some interest to someone.
And perhaps better understand myself in process.
1. I am value my time, I am not so young for learning whole new thing each
week.
2. I came to Racket
On Monday, August 12, 2019 at 10:50:03 AM UTC-4, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
>
> Robby, I'm still not certain we all have a shared understanding of some
> of the concerns and where we all stand, so please let me try to get at
> that some of that:
>
> > As for adopting-new-syntax vs
Points well taken, Neil. My messages were probably better unsent.
Robby
On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 9:50 AM Neil Van Dyke wrote:
>
> Robby, I'm still not certain we all have a shared understanding of some
> of the concerns and where we all stand, so please let me try to get at
> that some of that:
Robby, I'm still not certain we all have a shared understanding of some
of the concerns and where we all stand, so please let me try to get at
that some of that:
As for adopting-new-syntax vs backwards-compatibility, does it help if I were to tell you
that anything new will always be "opt
On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 07:49:30 -0500,
Robby Findler wrote:
>
> There are piles of lecture notes (in the form of slide presentations
> written in Racket) from the late 90s (so not in any continuous
> integration system anywhere, as far as I know) that still run fine in
> today's Racket for example.
Sounds like you're going to take a wait-and-see attitude, which sounds
wise to me, but you are also welcome to participate in the discussion!
As for adopting-new-syntax vs backwards-compatibility, does it help if
I were to tell you that anything new will always be "opt in", in the
sense that
Thank you for your answer. I wait then to see.
>Honu
Yes, documentation is really lacking.
воскресенье, 11 августа 2019 г., 23:19:06 UTC+3 пользователь Neil Van Dyke
написал:
>
> Atlas, I get the impression, from the impassioned discussion thus far,
> that a lot of the community really wants
My question was not about backwards compatibility, but about adopting new
default syntax.
For me it is as good as dropping s-expressions because only default\main
syntax is what really mater for me.
Sorry for not expressing myself clearly enough.
воскресенье, 11 августа 2019 г., 21:47:20 UTC+3
Atlas, I get the impression, from the impassioned discussion thus far,
that a lot of the community really wants an s-expression syntax (and
print form for data) to be not merely backwards-compatibile supported,
*but to remain fully a "first-class citizen"*.
I suspect that the top-level
Matthew posted an (IMO) clear explanation of the state of the thinking here
earlier. tl;dr: sexpressions will never be abandoned and backwards
compatibility with existing languages will be maintained for the
foreseeable future.
... but read his message if you are worried. I believe it is
I just see pretty broad discussion of new non s-expression syntax on GitHub
with lots of code examples and even some draft specification.
Here https://github.com/racket/racket2-rfcs/issues/3
And here https://github.com/racket/racket2-rfcs/pull/88/
And I just cannot understand whats going on.
On Sun, 11 Aug 2019 07:51:53 -0700 (PDT)
Atlas Atlas wrote:
> I don't known how racket is managed. Can someone clarify for me the
> future of Racket.
>
>
> Is abandoning s-expressions is sealed decision?
>
>
> What chances that this will happen? 10% 50% 80% 100%?
>
As far as I understood
I don't known how racket is managed. Can someone clarify for me the future
of Racket.
Is abandoning s-expressions is sealed decision?
What chances that this will happen? 10% 50% 80% 100%?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
16 matches
Mail list logo
