On Wednesday, 20 January 2021 at 12:34:59 UTC+11 Robby Findler wrote: I'm no expert on algebras, but I think the way to work on this is not to > think "what Racket constructs are close that I might coopt to express what > I want?" but instead to think "what do I want my programs to look like" and > then design the language from there, reusing libraries as they seem helpful > or designing new ones that do what you want. Racket's > language-implementation facilities are pretty powerful (of course, if there > is nothing like what you end up needing, there will still be actual > programming to do ;). >
Thanks Robby -- that's a very interesting way to look at library design that seems to make particular sense in the Racket environment. Stu -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/b56bd80d-dbc3-4bda-9aa2-07e2545a9ca7n%40googlegroups.com.
