On Aug 11, 2011, at 8:13 AM, Joan Arnaldich wrote: > Well, as I said, I'm pretty new to Racket, but so far there are two > main things that I think make it pretty unique: first one is > extensibility, which is very well covered in the article now. The > second one (always IMHO) is that, a part from having a solid > theoretical basis, it is very practical (pragmatic?). It is not only a > beautiful language: it is a language you can get your stuff done, > quickly and reliably.
... good stuff snipped ... > Dunno... what do you think? Do you expect for people to go and > directly edit the wikipedia article or would you rather do it > yourself... also, do you expect the discussion on the article to take > place here or over wikipedia? In general, I think we have an "err on the side of getting something done" attitude; if you can see a way to improve the page, I would personally encourage you to do it. Also, I think that the Racket folks are much less likely to see something posted on the Wikipedia Racket discussion page than they are on this list. Good to hear from you! John Clements
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
