[racket-dev] racket vs. scheme vs. clojure (as it appears to others)

From: Shriram Krishnamurthi (sk at cs.brown.edu)
Date: Wed May 4 20:17:30 EDT 2011

Justin is right other than the Java part.  Eli is right with the
amendment of -1 for the suggestion that Java has good parts worth
borrowing. (-:

On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Eli Barzilay <eli at barzilay.org> wrote:
> 20 minutes ago, Justin Zamora wrote:
>> On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 3:20 AM, D Herring <dherring at tentpost.com> wrote:
>> > You might emphasize that Racket is a "new language, borrowing the
>> > best parts of Scheme (and other languages?) and extending it with
>> > these features"...
>> A sentence like that would be a good replacement for the awful,
>> "Racket is a programming language" currently on the front page of
>> racket-lang.org Perhaps something like "Racket is a new language
>> that borrows the best parts of Scheme, Java, and other languages and
>> extends them with advanced features such as contracts, types,
>> user-defined languages, a complete GUI framework and other modern
>> features."
> -1 for any mention of Java.
> --
>          ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x)))          Eli Barzilay:
>                    http://barzilay.org/                   Maze is Life!
> _________________________________________________
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev

Posted on the dev mailing list.