On Tue, 3 Jun 2014 12:47:18 -0400 Matthias Felleisen <matth...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
Hello Matthias, > Your mail calls for a philosophical answer. If this were Eiffel, you > would be correct. Recently I stumbled upon some application discovering it is written in Eiffel and I had become curious to investigate a bit about the language seeing DbC as interesting concept... > > But Racket is not Eiffel: > -- we are not a tools company that sells a language > -- we spent our own time on a maintenance effort that goes above and > beyond our jobs -- and we don't provide a standard language (meant to > make developers happy and its creators famous and wealthy). > > Racket is a programming language programming language [not a typo]. > We wish to go beyond conventional features. When it comes to > contracts, this means we wish to provide (1) higher-order contracts > so that we cover the full spectrum of linguistic features and (2) a > programmable toolbox so that programmers can create their own > favorite idioms -- above and beyond the stuff available in standard > languages. ...but your (philosophical) anwer does answer all the possible doubts which language to use for the project. ;) Thanks a lot for your input!! Sincerely, Saša -- As a blazing fire turns firewood to ashes, O Arjuna, so does the fire of knowledge burn to ashes all reactions to material activities. -- 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/qqu15l%242ipv%241%40blaine.gmane.org.
