Actually I had a look, and besides having a nice development environment and lots of documentation, there are also heaps of interesting libraries, too
http://docs.racket-lang.org/plot/index.html http://docs.racket-lang.org/index.html -á. On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 22:36, Sam Liddicott <s...@liddicott.com> wrote: > Define-syntax at docs.racket-lang.org/quick/ reminds me of drd's > > Sam > > On Jan 27, 2012 10:06 AM, "Alvaro Tejero Cantero" <alv...@minin.es> wrote: >> >> Racket, formerly known as PLT Scheme, seems to receive a lot of >> attention from users and developers: >> >> http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?RacketLanguage >> >> http://racket-lang.org/ >> >> >> -á. >> >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 07:42, Joris van der Hoeven >> <vdhoe...@texmacs.org> wrote: >> > Hi Karl, >> > >> > On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 02:46:48PM -0700, Karl Hegbloom wrote: >> >> I'm wondering if anyone is presently working on patching TeXmacs so >> >> that it >> >> will build and run with Guile 2.0. In the Guile-2.0 NEWS file, I see >> >> that >> >> "The GH interface (deprecated in version 1.6, 2001) was removed." >> >> TeXmacs >> >> fails to build because it's looking for <guile/gh.h> which is no longer >> >> present. >> > >> > Yes, I am aware of the problem, but I have not really been working on it >> > yet. >> > Guile induces a *lot* of problems at the moment and it is not even clear >> > that >> > we really want to go all the way to Guile 2.*. On the one hand, it is >> > true that >> > Guile 2.0 includes a much faster byte code interpreter. On the other >> > hand though, >> > Guile is growing more and more maximalistic: the number of dependencies >> > is >> > going out of hand, making portability a major concern. Also, Guile 2.0 >> > now relies on Boehm GC for garbage collection; having used this garbage >> > collector in another project, I am very suspicious and fear that this >> > move >> > may introduce subtle bugs and make code harder to debug. I have >> > discussed >> > these issues on the GNU developers list and the Guile developers are >> > willing >> > to make things a little bit better. Yet, it is not clear at all that >> > this >> > will be enough. Massimiliano has started to look for possible >> > replacements >> > of Guile. Another solution would be to stick to an old version, include >> > the sources with TeXmacs and take care of maintainance issues ourselves. >> > >> > Best wishes, --Joris >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Texmacs-dev mailing list >> > Texmacs-dev@gnu.org >> > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Texmacs-dev mailing list >> Texmacs-dev@gnu.org >> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > Texmacs-dev mailing list > Texmacs-dev@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev > _______________________________________________ Texmacs-dev mailing list Texmacs-dev@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev
