At Tue, 22 Feb 2011 20:48:41 -0500,
Eli Barzilay wrote:
> * I wish that I could write more real code for types.
Do you mean type-level computation?
> * And of course I wish that compilation would be much faster.
We've got a couple of ideas to improve that, but we haven't had time
to try them yet
11 hours ago, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
> As is, it is almost a two-edged compliment. A mean-spirited MLer or
> Haskeller -- not that there are any -- would and should reply with
> "told you so. You should have used ML or Haskell and you would have
> been even more productive."
I think that the
not boring at all.
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Robby Findler
wrote:
> And from my perspective, thanks to Matthias for keeping track of all
> this (boring?) history stuff and reminding of the important stuff when
> it matters.
>
> Robby
> _
> F
On Feb 22, 2011, at 11:01 AM, Danny Yoo wrote:
>> -- I wrote a compiler
>> -- I benefited from TR because ...
>> -- And I need X Y and Z from R because pedestrian languages
>>such as ML and Haskell don't support it
>
> I should add that I'm using other parts of Racket, like the web-se
To contribute to the group hug from a wallflower distance...
Speaking from a perspective of doing large production systems in Racket,
I find Typed Racket very promising.
And besides the technical benefits of TR, there is also a political one:
for help in handling objections from people who ar
And from my perspective, thanks to Matthias for keeping track of all
this (boring?) history stuff and reminding of the important stuff when
it matters.
Robby
_
For list-related administrative tasks:
http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
>From Danny and me, a no-thank-you to all these other people, too!
Shriram
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Shriram Krishnamurthi
> wrote:
>> So: are we henceforth forbidden from praising Sam for his work unless
>> we can demonstr
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Shriram Krishnamurthi
wrote:
> So: are we henceforth forbidden from praising Sam for his work unless
> we can demonstrate that the work would have been *impossible* in any
> other language?
Without taking a position on the question raised here, I want to
emphasi
I'm sure Matthias knows that you can *intend* whatever you want, but
once a language is put in public, people can use it however they like.
So: are we henceforth forbidden from praising Sam for his work unless
we can demonstrate that the work would have been *impossible* in any
other language? (P
> -- I wrote a compiler
> -- I benefited from TR because ...
> -- And I need X Y and Z from R because pedestrian languages
> such as ML and Haskell don't support it
I should add that I'm using other parts of Racket, like the web-server
package, to let me write automated tests on the prot
Nevertheless, for one not acquainted with the history, I'm quite sure
this was a heartfelt compliment and one that should be taken in the
spirit given, no?
Robby
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Matthias Felleisen
wrote:
>
> On Feb 22, 2011, at 7:43 AM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
>>
>> You shou
On Feb 22, 2011, at 7:43 AM, Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>
> You should have written the compiler in ML. -- Matthias
>
Since not even some of my oldest students understand this remark,
let me explain this answer in gory detail.
1. The idea that changing data definitions demand a typed languag
You should have written the compiler in ML. -- Matthias
On Feb 22, 2011, at 3:45 AM, Danny Yoo wrote:
> I do want to say that, despite some troubles I've been having with
> Typed Racket, it's still awesome. I'm building another prototype
> Racket->JS compiler, and because it's still very expe
I want to second this. It is interesting that an argument for untyped
languages often goes along the lines of what is Danny saying here is a
benefit of a typed language.
N.
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Danny Yoo wrote:
> I do want to say that, despite some troubles I've been having with
> Ty
I do want to say that, despite some troubles I've been having with
Typed Racket, it's still awesome. I'm building another prototype
Racket->JS compiler, and because it's still very experimental, I find
myself having to change the data types a lot. I'm using Typed Racket
to code it, and it's been
15 matches
Mail list logo
