I just want to give one thought as input to this discussion and will admit,
that I did not read every (but some) of the posts above.
When I write code in Racket or Scheme, I mostly like the parentheses, as
they make writing the code easy. I can very easily select a block and move
it around,
On Mon, 22 Jul 2019 at 18:39, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> The shell demo is great. I can't look closely at `#lang something`
> quite yet, and I hope someone will include it in a list of the most
> interesting prior work for everyone interested in new syntax to look at.
>
Done:
Thanks very much! Will your talk also be available Matthew? After all the
racket2 talks it sparked here, I'm kind of curious.
On Friday, July 19, 2019 at 12:19:44 PM UTC-7, Matthew Flatt wrote:
>
> Individual videos for this year's RacketCon talks are now available:
>
>
Matthew Butterick wrote on 7/21/19 4:46 PM:
But as was true for a lot of kids like me during that era, computers were a
refuge. They never judged me. They rewarded my curiosity.
There's a complementary acceptance component to the microcomputer
revolutions, which I think are relevant to
>
>
> On Friday, July 19, 2019 at 12:19:44 PM UTC-7, Matthew Flatt wrote:
>>
>> Individual videos for this year's RacketCon talks are now available:
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXr4KViVC0qJp4_2uTTAOjt-4URQBAR4c
>>
>
Den man. 22. jul. 2019 kl. 23.36 skrev Kees-Jochem Wehrmeijer <
FYI
https://github.com/racket/racket2-rfcs/blob/master/prior-art.md
--
--
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
Aloha folks,
I had to miss RacketCon this year as we have a new 6 month old at home and
couldn't make the trek out.
But I would love to lend my efforts to support the initiative to explore a
Racket universe without parens. If folks out there are working on this,
shoot me an email
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 7:15 AM Alexis King wrote:
>
> On Jul 22, 2019, at 14:16, Dexter Lagan wrote:
> To say that Racket is so defined by its syntax that it will cease to be
> distinguishable from any other language if it is changed is absurd, and it’s
> frankly insulting to all the people
Hi Zelphir,
Your concerns are absolutely warranted.
>From what I've seen there is no advantage that editors can give you with
parens, that they can't do better without parens, *given that you've
written loads of tests and done the grunt work to make that happen*.
Hence, it doesn't make sense to
On Monday, July 22, 2019 at 6:17:47 PM UTC-4, Zelphir Kaltstahl wrote:
>
> I just want to give one thought as input to this discussion and will
> admit, that I did not read every (but some) of the posts above.
>
> When I write code in Racket or Scheme, I mostly like the parentheses, as
> they
You should be able to keep the current Racket,
download a snapshot build,
and run the `/bin/drracket` inside the snapshot
https://www.cs.utah.edu/plt/snapshots/
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group
I'm not going over why s-expressions are the way to go, mr. Rivest did it
best in his 1997 MIT doc:
https://people.csail.mit.edu/rivest/Sexp.txt
A parens-less Racket2 would become Crystal. And I don't think we need yet
another functional parens-less language. We already have Haskell (hard to
First I’d like to express my immense gratitude for your contributions to the
Racket community. Beautiful Racket greatly enhanced my understanding of
language-oriented programming and macros in general.
TL;DR: Racket is the most inspiring language and ecosystem I have ever used. I
use it not
I have read through all the posts before mine, and saw no reference to what
could be the solution to the adoption problem.
I only remember comments regarding how students feel unconfortable about
s-expressions and all those parenthesis
Making a language popular in my view is to make it
I have read through all the posts before mine, and saw no reference to what
could be the solution to the adoption problem.
I only remember comments regarding how students feel unconfortable about
s-expressions and all those parenthesis
Making a language popular in my view is to make it
Hello!
I'm trying to use srfi/29. As far as I understand, it provide
declare-bundle! + store-bundle to make a localization and load-bundle! to
use it.
But I cannot find, how to use raco pkg install to run declare-bundle! +
store-bundle. Or is there any other way to run post-install command in
https://pkgs.racket-lang.org/package/multicolumn
суббота, 20 июля 2019 г., 8:17:58 UTC+5 пользователь Raoul Schorer написал:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am trying to make a gui editable table. Is that possible in racket/gui?
>
> It seems list-box% is not editable by default. Apparently, one can't stick
>
Dear All,
For reasons (explained below, possibly foolish reasons) I am trying to do the
following:
1. Have `raco pkg install` install a package X to a specific directory,
including, in the same directory, all of the dependencies of X, but excluding
those dependencies that are already present
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 02:19:39AM -0700, Maria Gabriela Guimarães wrote:
...
>
> I have mentioned this one, and will repeat again:
>
> *Make Racket become Language-Oriented Programming on the JVM, the ErlangVM,
> and perhaps other mainstream VMs.*
And the JVM in browsers has been thoroughly
[[ Note: I sent this yesterday but the Google list server bounced it.
Although I told Matthew I was fine leaving it that way, with only
him seeing it, he encouraged me to post it again. ]]
Thank you for replying, Matthew.
It sounds like surface syntax, other back-ends, and better
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 10:46:26AM +0200, Dexter Lagan wrote:
> I'm not going over why s-expressions are the way to go, mr. Rivest did it
> best in his 1997 MIT doc:
>
> https://people.csail.mit.edu/rivest/Sexp.txt
>
> A parens-less Racket2 would become Crystal. And I don't think we need yet
> On Jul 22, 2019, at 14:16, Dexter Lagan wrote:
>
> A parens-less Racket2 would become Crystal.
No it won’t. I am quite confident that Racket with any syntax will not be like
any other language that currently exists. What other language has Racket’s
advanced, robust compile-time
> And the JVM in browsers has been thoroughly supplanted by Javascript.
I missed another VM: Racket2 should also target WebAssembly.
segunda-feira, 22 de Julho de 2019 às 14:44:06 UTC+1, Hendrik Boom escreveu:
>
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 02:19:39AM -0700, Maria Gabriela Guimarães wrote:
> ...
On Monday, July 22, 2019 at 4:26:04 PM UTC+2, Mário Guimarães wrote:
>
>
> > And the JVM in browsers has been thoroughly supplanted by Javascript.
>
> I missed another VM: Racket2 should also target WebAssembly.
>
I experimented with various scheme in browser intrepred via JavaScript and
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 12:25:22PM -0600, Matthew Flatt wrote:
> > At Thu, 18 Jul 2019 12:28:53 -0400, Hendrik Boom wrote:
> > > Did some measurements.
> > >
> > > 800K of text, represented as 80 scribble files each of 10K bytes,
> > > each included using @include-section from one file:
> > > 7
Like I said, my limited experience makes my opinion of limited interest. I’m
really only speaking from a practical standpoint, meaning, how a Python or Java
programmer would see Racket. For example, I have no experience with language
design, and I only used Racket and Scribble as-is. Most
> I experimented with various scheme in browser intrepred via JavaScript
and compiled to wasm both are not good enough.
Insufficient implementations I suppose, or wasm misses features important
for a Scheme ...
Em segunda-feira, 22 de julho de 2019 15:33:59 UTC+1, amz3 escreveu:
>
>
>
> On
More specifically, I was referring to design goals for S-expressions:
-- generality: S-expressions should be good at representing arbitrary data.
-- readability: it should be easy for someone to examine and understand the
structure of an S-expression.
-- economy: S-expressions should
On 22/07/2019 16:52, Maria Gabriela Guimarães wrote:
> > I experimented with various scheme in browser intrepred via
> JavaScript and compiled to wasm both are not good enough.
>
> Insufficient implementations I suppose, or wasm misses features
> important for a Scheme ...
>
Someone wanting to
Maria Gabriela Guimarães wrote on 7/22/19 10:52 AM:
> I experimented with various scheme in browser intrepred via
JavaScript and compiled to wasm both are not good enough.
Insufficient implementations I suppose, or wasm misses features
important for a Scheme ...
What Maria said. WASM (not
The current process of Racket2 development is something I've been through
before; it is *exactly* what happened when Perl6 was announced. It might
be instructive for people to dig into that process a bit and see what the
methods and discussions were all about, since it ended up working pretty
There is also qresults-list, which is from Alex Harsanyi's ActivityLog2
application. You can see how it is used in that application.
https://pkgs.racket-lang.org/package/qresults-list
https://github.com/alex-hhh/ActivityLog2
On Jul 22, 2019, at 7:22 AM, Roman Klochkov wrote:
>
The shell demo is great. I can't look closely at `#lang something`
quite yet, and I hope someone will include it in a list of the most
interesting prior work for everyone interested in new syntax to look at.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket
On Monday, July 22, 2019 at 1:07:21 PM UTC-4, Caleb Allen wrote:
>
> As an additional data point, I can share my very fast introduction into
> Racket and the community. You asked for experiences where the community may
> have made people feel unwelcome, but mine is a positive experience. I share
As an additional data point, I can share my very fast introduction into
Racket and the community. You asked for experiences where the community may
have made people feel unwelcome, but mine is a positive experience. I share
it to perhaps give an angle of what *is* right, and the parts of the
On Monday, July 22, 2019 at 9:53:35 AM UTC-4, Greg Hendershott wrote:
>
> > Improved tooling also seems high-effort -- medium-risk --
> > medium-reward. I'll defer to those who concentrate more on tools,
> > including the author of Racket mode for Emacs, to suggest a priority
> > for this one.
Brian Adkins wrote on 7/22/19 1:28 PM:
Being unfamiliar with some of Racket's unique benefits, I initially
felt it was simply the best Scheme I could choose for professional
development.
Same here. (Long-timers have heard my story too many times... After I
picked Scheme for my new
37 matches
Mail list logo
