possible to use racket for programming?

have you tried?

I use it to create my chess-based strategy gaem

>>2
nice
I read the docs and I see you can make a website in it too?
But some things are not like scheme

racket is a scheme

I remember, when I was reading my SICP, there was some library for creating presentations for Scheme. Has anyone else workeed with that? Pretty cool, a useless toy feature for a useless toy language.

>>5
is it scribble?

>>5
It's fun to use, but it's locked in 4:3 and there's no way to change that without editing the source.

I do my prototyping in Racket through Dr Racket. If I care enough, that program will be ported to Chicken Scheme.

>>3

But some things are not like scheme

IIRC you can force Racket to use R5RS or R6RS

>>7

without editing the source

Where do you think you are boy?

check dubs

>>9
By adding a #lang bullshitte on the top of the file, which happens to be incompatible to RnRS.

>>12
can't you force it with a compiler/interpreter flag? that's pretty stupid if you can't

>>13
Nope, you can not.

>>14
well then, maybe you can just make a racket file with the #lang directive on top to act as a racket loader for standard scheme projects? it's a silly hack and I'd rather use flags but I guess it's better than nothing

>>15
I ended up making a script that auto-added the #lang bullshitte.
Since the racket module system is shitty as well I ended up replacing that as well while I was at it.

#!/bin/sh
TMP=$(mktemp)
printf %"s\n" "#lang racket" "(require compatibility/defmacro)" > $TMP

if [ -f "./order" ]
then
cat $TMP $(cat ./order | sed 's/\s.*$//') > out.sexpr
else
cat $TMP $(ls *.scm *.sexpr | sort) > out.sexpr
fi

racket -l errortrace -t out.sexpr

>>17

“I liken starting one's computing career with Unix, say as a undergraduate, to being born in East Africa. It is intolerably hot, your body is covered with lice and flies, you are malnourished and you suffer from numerous curable diseases. But, as far as young East Africans can tell, this is simply the natural condition and they live within it. By the time they find out differently, it is too late. They already think that the writing of shell scripts is a natural act.” — Ken Pier, Xerox PARC

>>18
The first time I saw a shell script, I knew right there that I'd rather study Perl than deal with that shit.

>>19
Perl isn't much of an improvement

>>20
Still rather use it.

Or python.

>>22
python is pretty cool IMHO (inb4 'one word'), but I think it's as far from perl as a dynamic scripting language can get. it's all about human-readable code and easy manipulation of ad-hoc data structures, while perl looks like line noise and happily unpacks all the structures unless you specifically ask it not to

>>1

I used it to create a shell like DSL That was kinda nice to do and used Racket specific facilities. And to implement coroutines, but you can do that in any scheme. It has some interesting things though, like delimited continuations (shift/reset).

>>23
So you have to learn a bit of syntax. Personally, I prefer terse code over verbose. And perl's got a lot better control flow than sh or DCL.

>>23
There really isn't much difference. Python is used for the same shit Perl was used for and has about the same average code quality. You still have people badly extracting shit with buggy regexes that break all the time, and error messages? What are error messages? Dropping the user to a stack trace into Python internals is totally acceptable for user-facing software! On top of that, upgrading Python is a pain in the ass just like Perl used to be. I really don't see the difference.

>>25
terse is ok, the problem is that Perl promotes ''''''''''''''''''''''clever'''''''''''''''''''''' tricks achieve terseness. code golfing isn't just a game in this language how things are done. and we all know that this is a pretty stupid way to program.

>>26
oh, I agree that most of code written in Python sucks. but Python has good idioms and promotes a different coding style, it's just that shell and Perl scripters who migrated to it actively fight against it. if you write it the 'pythonic' way, you rarely if ever touch regexes because you work with lists, dicts and objects instead of strings (I've been programming in FIOC for years and I only used a regex once, and it was copied from an RFC anyway). of course the 'pythonic' way has its flaws, but they're of a completely different kind and mostly have to do with the language's shortcomings when it comes to FP and concurrency.

>>27

the problem is that Perl promotes ''''''''''''''''''''''clever'''''''''''''''''''''' tricks achieve terseness.

But so does Python

>>28
does it? IMHO Python encourages a fairly clear and readable style. the only things that are encouraged that might be seen as clever hacks are comprehension syntax and ternaries, but the syntax for them is more intuitive than Perlish sigil abuse

>>29
Dictionaries as switch comes to mind.

>>30
Maps as a mapping, how surprising.

>>29-31
Actually, everything is a set, so hacks don't exist.

Check my singles.

>>33
omg your're are retarded