Others will have better advice, but a few thoughts:
Josh Rubin <jlru...@gmail.com> writes: > I have questions. > (1) Should I be trying to *port* old Scheme code to Racket (a big job) or > should I be *creating a language* that mostly runs the old code as is? As an early "warm-up" step, maybe try to port some small chunk(s) of your old Scheme code to Racket, by hand? You'll start to learn some of the issues -- get a feel for what might be involved if you were to port the rest by hand, or, depend more on "adapter" code, or, even create a full #lang. To attempt the last of these right off the bat, might be overwhelming? It would be, to me. But I guess it depends on your learning style. Also it depends whether you like to work more "top down" vs. "bottom up". People who know older Scheme dialects better than me might have more-specific tips. > (2) Should I record all my false starts and confusions in a blog called "An > old man tries to learn Racket"? > Might interest struggling racketeers, or people who try to teach them. That would be great! Idea: The cool kids these days tend to create an account on GitHub or GitLab. That way, other folks can see the code and more easily offer advice. Plus, the commit history is itself a story about your journey doing this. The commit messages can even be sort of mini blog posts, draft material for real blog posts. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/87tve03hkv.fsf%40greghendershott.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
