Beautiful Racket v1.0
beautifulracket.com
Beautiful Racket v1.0
1–10 of 60 posts
Re: Beautiful Racket v1.0
#2I'd just like to say that I admire Matthew Butterick's creative experimentation with business models for web publishing and absolutely adore Practical Typography to the extent that I've purchased several of his fonts and intend to purchase Beautiful Racket as well. It can be hard to imagine that there's a world for type design on computers outside the formulaic mundanity and advertisement-laden nature of the rest of the web, but then you get brilliant stuff like Practical Typography and now Beautiful Racket and you can see the world we don't have in contrast to the one that we do...
Re: Beautiful Racket v1.0
#3I have read part of this book and it is a really well written book especially to use racket to construct computer languages . I didn't understand how to use racket to make languages until I read this book.
Re: Beautiful Racket v1.0
#4Cool. I'm always game for a good discussion of DSL's and Lisp (Racket).
But what struck me immediately was the quality of the "Why Lisp Why Racket" essay. This is probably the most compelling that I've seen as it gets specific and cites near-term benefits – not just the elitist "it's good for you" or "it'll make you smarter" stuff. Nicely done.
Re: Beautiful Racket v1.0
#5Matthew recently moved off of twitter and publishes an email newsletter: http://tinyletter.com/mbutterick
It is one of the few newsletters that I actually enjoy reading and is satisfyingly infrequent.
Re: Beautiful Racket v1.0
#6I'd just like to say that I admire Matthew Butterick's creative experimentation with business models for web publishing and absolutely adore Practical Typography to the extent that I've purchased several of his fonts and intend to purchase Beautiful Racket as well. It can be hard to imagine that there's a world for type design on computers outside the formulaic mundanity and advertisement-laden nature of the rest of…
It would be nice for there to be a bit more institutional knowledge on how to get people to pay for your product among these experiments.
Too many times I see projects say they're not making much money from these sorts of efforts, but when I go to the project I can't even figure out how to give them money! LWN is a prime example of lost opportunities (count how many steps it takes to go from "see subscriber link" to "be subscribed")
Personally, I'd throw something in the footer of every page of this book to link to a payment page. Make it easier for people to give you money after reading something interesting! Nagware might be annoying, but "this book is not free", right?
EDIT: Just went through the LWN subscriber flow. It took me... 10 steps? to get subscribed. I've dropped out of this flow before
Re: Beautiful Racket v1.0
#7Very interesting. I'm currently going through the little schemer using Racket. I'm tempted to read this one after it.
Re: Beautiful Racket v1.0
#8I'd just like to say that I admire Matthew Butterick's creative experimentation with business models for web publishing and absolutely adore Practical Typography to the extent that I've purchased several of his fonts and intend to purchase Beautiful Racket as well. It can be hard to imagine that there's a world for type design on computers outside the formulaic mundanity and advertisement-laden nature of the rest of…
It would be nice for there to be a bit more institutional knowledge on how to get people to pay for your product among these experiments. Too many times I see projects say they're not making much money from these sorts of efforts, but when I go to the project I can't even figure out how to give them money! LWN is a prime example of lost opportunities (count how many steps it takes to go from "see subscriber link" to…
In particular "this book is not free" while giving the whole thing away really emphasizes the dissonance you have to deal with when exposing yourself like this but it does so transparently and unpretentiously, I think.
Re: Beautiful Racket v1.0
#9I'm an intermediate scheme programmer (experienced in C, Python, etc), and one thing I really didn't like about R6RS in general, and Racket in particular, is the amount of bloat.
I'm a staunch minimalist and one of the things that appealed to me learning scheme for the first time was the minimalism of the language syntax. Then I started learning about Racket (and Clojure) and realized they give you the kitchen sink of syntax and language features and take all the minimalism away.
So my question is: How much extra effort would it be if I wanted to do whatever is described in this book in an R7RS implementation, like Chibi, instead of R6RS?
Re: Beautiful Racket v1.0
#10I'm an intermediate scheme programmer (experienced in C, Python, etc), and one thing I really didn't like about R6RS in general, and Racket in particular, is the amount of bloat. I'm a staunch minimalist and one of the things that appealed to me learning scheme for the first time was the minimalism of the language syntax. Then I started learning about Racket (and Clojure) and realized they give you the kitchen sink o…
https://github.com/lexi-lambda/racket-r7rs
Racket can be used in many ways.