[racket] racket, scheme, and message-passing clusters?

From: chris lanz (lanzcc at potsdam.edu)
Date: Mon Oct 4 11:14:10 EDT 2010

Thanks to Jay and Robby for their replies.

I honestly don't care what form of message-passing I use, I just don't want to

write my own. My app will eventually run different very large programs (100,000

lines of C-like procedural code) on clustered machines controlled by a head node.

I have to rewrite all my original code in SOMETHING (it's in PASCAL because

that's what I'm virtuosic in and that's what I've been using for 25 years) 
and I
was preparing to rewrite in C and use MPI, but I've decided it's better to

switch all at once.

If I learn Gambit Scheme (that apparently includes an Erlang link),
 how far from
Racket is that?

Or is there a better solution? For instance, should I use Racket (which is my

preference because we might start teaching it here) and assume that by the time

I need it (a few years from now) there will be some intrinsic clustering



lanzcc at potsdam.edu

Posted on the users mailing list.