On Jun 12, 2012, at 12:03 PM, Hillary Ryan wrote: > Hello, > > Disclaimer: I am new to Racket, so please forgive the ignorance. > > Questions: > 1) As a functional language, when Racket implemented classes did it do so > with a different perspective or design philosophy than procedural languages > that made a similar transition? In other words, what is the correct, Rackety > way to think about and to use classes?
The most important difference is that classes are values just like functions and numbers. > 2) Reading through the documentation it seems that there are three different > ways to update fields: > > How do these approaches differ? And when should I use one over the other? There are two ways: an imperative one (using set!) and a functional one (using new this%). As long as your performance is acceptable, I'd recommend the second one. ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
