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 somewhere 2 years ago, and it was advertised to me as *LISP* with reasonable infrastructure(coming from C# this is what I am used to), otherwise I would *never* have spent time on Racket. (I find however that libs not in great shape). 3. I have few libs already that I was planed to publish, few prototypes and few starter projects. I invested 2 years of my time to Racket. 4. News that Racket can became non lisp is devastating for me. It just crosses out the 2 years of my life. I am not happy even of jokes of such kind. And no efforts for backward compatibility can change this, they just don't matter. 5. I am however see a lots of places where Racket can improve. And I am not afraid of changes that break things. I am not fun of maintaining backward compatibility in the cost of progress, modern technologies is fast evolving and this is reality that we all must faced. *(Some programming languages manage to absorb change, but withstand progress - Alan J. Perlis) * If this is real improvements, then they a paying for themselves. Some degree of compatibility good of course, but this is not something that lots of effort should be putted, especially when there is a huge problems to solve. Lets break things to improve. Real improvements will be worth to rewrite some lib's from scratch. And the benefits of improvements should be clearly communicated to community. What I see as fields to improve is infrastructure in first place. - 1 Better and more consistent standard library. (date time processing, fold map for collections of any type,* new number types perhaps? as uint16 uint32 uint64 int16 int32 int64 and homogeneous vectors with them*) - 2 Improvements on type system - 3 Official auto documentation mechanism - 4 Dr.Racket overall improvements and multi threading support - 5 Internationalization support for documentation and tooling - 6 Syntax changes. *Of course, it can be worth to make one major syntax change in the first place, and then improve other fields on top of this.* I already pointed out on what considerations syntax changes can be provided in different places. I will repeat it here one more time: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEFrE6cgVNY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3zEOsh8AnQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ps3mBPcjySE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sg4U4r_AgJU In general I want to see perceptual science and statistical research as basis for this changes not abandoning common sense and practicality. Although I decided to wait for a couple of weeks, I do not feel in a position to invent a new big programming language right now. And I really don't have time to wait. I have already begun to study an alternatives for my practical tasks. I need a tool on what I can rely on. Programming language must solve problems, not creating them. Perhaps it is actually good for Racket to move from s-expressions, personally I can suggest shocking for lispers/schemers changes staying within s-expressions. I just feel overall cheated and false advertised. I was advertised stable tool, and now I am somehow involved in new programming language design. I need some time to digest this further, but overall this is shocking experience. Long answer I wrote... понедельник, 12 августа 2019 г., 15:49:45 UTC+3 пользователь Robby Findler написал: > > 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 existing programs will continue to work completely > unchanged with no special annotations or anything else like that > required? > > Robby > -- 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/52c2f2ae-d635-4d2e-90f8-50788dd730f6%40googlegroups.com.
