>> Maybe some Racketeers would scout Gambit, Chicken, Bigloo, Guile, etc.,
>> communities for any useful packages that Racket doesn't yet have, and
#lang Gambit
?
!
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group
No need to stop at packages - whole languages. (I fancy doing Self when I
am a better programmer)
On Wed, 24 Feb 2016 at 21:23, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> Brian Adkins wrote on 02/24/2016 02:49 PM:
> > it appears to me that Racket is the strongest of the Scheme-ey lisps, so
> that's where I'm invest
Brian Adkins wrote on 02/24/2016 02:49 PM:
it appears to me that Racket is the strongest of the Scheme-ey lisps, so that's
where I'm investing my time.
After maintaining my open source packages on ~10 different
R4/5RS+SRFI-ish Scheme implementations, I came to a similar conclusion:
now I jus
It's always tricky when the bags of juices and meat get involved. :)
I'm definitely planning to never stop throwing my weight into Racket.
Robby
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 1:49 PM, Brian Adkins wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 2:40:23 PM UTC-5, Robby Findler wrote:
>> Scheme is great.
On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 2:40:23 PM UTC-5, Robby Findler wrote:
> Scheme is great. Racket isn't Scheme, although it draws a ton of
> inspiration from the language and it's design. Viva Scheme! Viva
> Racket!
>
> Robby
I agree, but I have mixed emotions. The lisp community is better than
Scheme is great. Racket isn't Scheme, although it draws a ton of
inspiration from the language and it's design. Viva Scheme! Viva
Racket!
Robby
On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Martin DeMello wrote:
> I don't know about scheme being racket; both chicken and gambit seem to have
> reasonably acti
I don't know about scheme being racket; both chicken and gambit seem to
have reasonably active communities.
I was also surprised at the 16k hits for pony, which has essentially no
ecosystem yet. but actually doing the google search it seems like there's
tons of noise in there.
martin
On Wed, Feb
Cool!
Now we just need to find a way to detect when people say Scheme but
really mean Racket. ;)
Vincent
On Wed, 24 Feb 2016 11:33:46 -0600,
Brian Adkins wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 12:24:59 PM UTC-5, Vincent St-Amour wrote:
> > If we add up the "Racket" and "Scheme" numbers
On Wednesday, February 24, 2016 at 12:24:59 PM UTC-5, Vincent St-Amour wrote:
> If we add up the "Racket" and "Scheme" numbers (the latter being, I
> suspect, mostly Racket), the total is pretty close to Ruby. I find that
> amusing. :)
>
> Actually, I'm curious what the numbers look like if you co
If we add up the "Racket" and "Scheme" numbers (the latter being, I
suspect, mostly Racket), the total is pretty close to Ruby. I find that
amusing. :)
Actually, I'm curious what the numbers look like if you count "PLT
Scheme" towards Racket.
Vincent
On Wed, 24 Feb 2016 11:06:51 -0600,
Brian A
10 matches
Mail list logo