Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Racket v9.0

blog.racket-lang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 129 posts

Re: Racket v9.0

#111

Post by foretop_yardarm »

stOneskull wrote: post #106
jetti wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What kinds of things do you write in Racket? I’m a clojure dev and so I’m a big fan of lisp. I’m just curious what kinds of projects you would use Racket for

i'm also curious.. do you use clojure because of jvm? i want to learn some kinda lisp, but there are so many choices. why not just common lisp or the one with emacs.

I use clojure over common lisp because I find the ecosystem (libraries) a bit more approachable (feels like there is more web oriented stuff in clojure, plus gui support with javafx.) That said, the actual experience of working in common lisp is better (bit better repl/recompilation, conditions, native compilation.) Personally, I don't find scheme as practical for writing programs as either of these two options (too fragmented and/or niche.)

Re: Racket v9.0

#112

Post by aeonik »

prakashrj wrote: post #88

https://youtu.be/LXhsutNKhec?si=OTC6sn5GNp1-ZxqU Racket is only hard if it's not your first language. Kids can also learn it.

Very impressive video. This is making me want to start my daughter out on scratch or Racket when the time comes.

His keyboard sounds amazing too. Buttery smooth pearls.

Re: Racket v9.0

#113

Post by kscarlet »

mono442 wrote: post #48

Speaking of lisp, if I wanted to use a lisp nowadays, what would be the best choice, common lisp, clojure or some scheme implementation?

Common Lisp. It's the hacker-est Lisp with a thriving hacker-est community.

Re: Racket v9.0

#114

Post by pjmlp »

lucyjojo wrote: post #108
stOneskull wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i'm also curious.. do you use clojure because of jvm? i want to learn some kinda lisp, but there are so many choices. why not just common lisp or the one with emacs.

personal case - clojure works on the jvm, or without (babashka, technically graalvm i think), or in the browser (clojurescript). i think there is a .net implementation, not sure. then you get clojure inspired languages that are quick to learn if you know clojure (janet, C runtime, fennel on the Lua platform). And soon a clojure optimized for integration with C++ (Jank). Bonus, clojure is relatively simple language. (…

There is a .NET version, but hardly gets much love, it is already a challenge for F#, and the Iron languages are gone as well.

Unfortunely the CLR seems to have changed meaning from Common Language Runtime to C# Language Runtime, regarding Microsoft focus on the ecosystem.

Re: Racket v9.0

#115

Post by pjmlp »

brabel wrote: post #68
wduquette wrote: post #30

I first experimented with Lisp back in the mid-80’s, and have returned to it time and again—not as a language for serious projects, but just as a way of learning new techniques and new ways to think about writing software. I’ve tried using Racket on a number of occasions going back to way before it was called that, and something about the software just puts me off. Perhaps I could get past that if I stuck with it, bu…

I liked it many years ago but when I noticed how slow and heavy my code was I left it. It manages to be slower than Python. Perhaps the Chez Scheme rewrite helped with that but now if I need a Lisp I have Common Lisp which is super fast and lightweight enough.

I wonder how, given that anything that brings Python and performance together, usually means it is actually C code, or similar, as PyPy is seldom reached for.

Raket is compiled, thus maybe not the right build parameters?

Re: Racket v9.0

#116

Post by pjmlp »

linguae wrote: post #20
epolanski wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And all of them agrees to never use it after university, which is quite telling.

I admit I'm one of those students who never used Racket in a non-academic setting (but mostly because I needed to contribute to already-existing projects written in different languages), and I was taught Racket from one of its main contributors, John Clements at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo. However, learning Racket planted a seed in me that would later grow into a love of programming languages beyond industry-standard i…

C++ is one of my favourite languages, and I got into a few cool jobs because of my C++ knowledge.

However, given the option I would mostly reach for managed compiled languages as first choice, and only if really, really required, to something like C++, and even then, probably to a native library that gets consumed, instead of 100% pure C++.

Re: Racket v9.0

#117

Post by pjmlp »

attila-lendvai wrote: post #44
kbutler wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, "write an interpreter for a subset of scheme" is a core use case for lisp-family languages. If it had been,"write a real-time driver for a memory-limited piece of hardware", you may have had a different preference.

that's an often repeated misconception about lisps. lisps are pretty good at low-level programming, but then you'll need to make some compromises like abandoning the reliance on the GC and managing memory manually (which is still a lot easier than in other languages due to the metaprogramming capabilities). there are lisps that can compile themselves to machine code in 2-4000 LoC altogether (i.e. compiler and assembl…

People always point out this as a failure, when it is the contrary.

A programming language being managed doesn't mean we need to close the door to any other kind of resource management.

Unless it is something hard real time, and there are options there as well, we get to enjoy the productivity of high level programming, while at the same time having the tools at our disposal to do low level systems stuff, without having to mix languages.

Re: Racket v9.0

#118

Post by eru »

bmitc wrote: post #81
jetti wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What kinds of things do you write in Racket? I’m a clojure dev and so I’m a big fan of lisp. I’m just curious what kinds of projects you would use Racket for

I'd say anything you use Clojure for except for Clojurescript.

And I guess expect for stuff where you really want Java integration?

Re: Racket v9.0

#120

Post by vindarel »

spdegabrielle wrote: post #37
hatmatrix wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are some difference between the education tooling around Racket and that which enables "industrial" applications Common Lisp is known for?

That's a good question. The education tooling is all optional (so their only impact is perceptual) DrRacket, teaching languages, and supporting libraries are all optional. (see Minimal Racket - just the compiler and package manager https://download.racket-lang.org/releases/9.0/#:~:text=SHA25... ) I'd like to know what tooling is missing from Racket that is available in major general purpose languages like C#, Java, o…

between CL, some say it's the debugging and interactive experience: https://gist.github.com/vindarel/c1ef5e043773921e3b11d8f4fe1...
Post reply on HN