Hello, On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 9:32 PM, Ian Price <ianpric...@googlemail.com>wrote:
> Daniel Hartwig <mand...@gmail.com> writes: > > > For those parts specific to racket, did you consider the (language > > racket ..) namespace, where an eventual language definition could be > > placed also? > > That sounds somewhat misleading, since Racket is not really one > language. Yeah, there is #lang racket, but they have others as well. > It's true that racket is both a programming system for many languages and the name of one specific language. I don't think it's too ambiguous to use (language racket ...) for that one specific language. After all, if we don't call it racket, then that language has no name! Unless you want to use (language racket ...) for all of the things supported by Racket, and maybe (language racket racket) for the actual #lang racket language. It seems excessive to me, but I'm not completely sure about that. Best, Noah
