1. 28
  1.  

  2. 3

    I agree with most of this.

    The lack of docstrings in particular is weird given that overall there’s a big emphasis on documentation. I disagree that the error messages are difficult to read; this kind of thing is pretty impressive and I wish I had it in other languages: http://p.hagelb.org/drracket-error.png The section on consistency is kind of weird; writing new code is quite consistent, but the language has been around a looooong time, and parts of the language haven’t aged that well. In particular the class system is kinda clunky, and there are older libraries that assume mutable data structures. But unless you’re doing a GUI program that is pretty easy to avoid.

    1. 2

      I disagree that the error messages are difficult to read; this kind of thing is pretty impressive and I wish I had it in other languages: http://p.hagelb.org/drracket-error.png

      That is cool! Not being a Dr. Racket user, though, I’m missing out on that.

      The section on consistency is kind of weird; writing new code is quite consistent, but the language has been around a looooong time, and parts of the language haven’t aged that well. In particular the class system is kinda clunky, and there are older libraries that assume mutable data structures. But unless you’re doing a GUI program that is pretty easy to avoid.

      It’s possible (likely, even) I just haven’t touched the clunky stuff yet. I’ve used a couple of the functions in the GUI package, but nothing major so far and I haven’t touched the class system at all apart from reading about it in the user guide.