On Mon, Aug 26, 2019 at 01:45:44AM -0700, Arie van Wingerden wrote: > When Racket2 was announced, I got really upset, being afraid that all what I > like about (the old) Racket would be at stake. Also it was mentioned that the > docs would be based on Racket2 syntax, which probably would hamper using them > for old school Racket. > > I really think that old school Racket should be saved for the future, because > it is the Scheme to go for many reasons e.g. superb IDE + debugging and many > good packages and of course the whole creative eco system. > > Question 1: > Please can you explicitly guarantee that Racket (#lang racket) will be > available for the future? > > Question 2: > Can you explicitely guarantee that the documentation for #lang racket will be > available in the future? > > Please know that I love DrRacket as a whole and that I am not against Racket2 > at all. I just like my favorite old Racket language to be available forever😊
Arguing from history: Every attempt to replace Lisp syntax over the last 50 years has failed. Some of the have produced new syntaxes that have prospered (such as javascript and our own Scribble), but none have ever displaced S-expressions. I have no fears about this. -- hendrik -- 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/20190826132846.qvuxx3hyedx2dto5%40topoi.pooq.com.
