On Dec 12, 2010, at 7:30 PM, Robby Findler wrote: > On Sunday, December 12, 2010, Matthias Felleisen <matth...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: >> >> All of this discussion suggests that we start developing RacketII, a >> language that is a true break from Scheme. Our backward compatibility >> constraints are just overwhelming our knowledge of what we know is 'bad' >> with Racket in relation to other languages. >> >> Perhaps TR is the proper place to start such a 'clean-break' movement. > > That sounds like a good thought to me, but I'd hate to have to port to > a new language to be able to get type checking.
This particular change is a good example: You'd have to get used to the idea that Integer denotes 'exact integer'. Is this really bad? Then again, perhaps we should produce a brand new #lang racket2 that is a true break and develop #lang typed/racket2 in parallel. _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
