[plt-dev] `rico' and ".rkt"

On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 9:09 AM, Matthew Flatt <mflatt at cs.utah.edu> wrote:
> More Racket plans for discussion:
>
>  * Some of us have discussed collapsing `setup-plt', `mzc', `planet',
>   `plt-help' and (in case I've overlooked any) other miscellaneous
>   programming tools into a single `rico' executable.
>
>   The `rico' program will take a command name, similar to `svn' and
>   other tools. For example, `setup-plt' would become `rico setup', and
>   `mzc' or `mzc --make' would become `rico make'.
>
>   We could further collapse `mzscheme' into `rico run', or we could
>   have just `racket' instead of `rico'. An advantage of separating
>   `racket' and `rico' is that `racket' can keep the command-line
>   syntax of `mzscheme'; for example `#! racket' will work for Unix
>   scripts. It may also be better to keep the run-time system separate
>   from development tools.

I like rico and racket. I like the idea of runtime vs dev tools.

>
>  * The file suffix for a Racket program could be ".rkt", but you
>   shouldn't have to change existing code that uses ".ss" either as a
>   file name or in a module reference.
>
>   We're not entirely sure how to achieve that second part, but here's
>   one idea that might work: In module paths names, ".ss" will be
>   equivalent and normalized to ".rkt". The module-name resolver,
>   meanwhile, will convert ".rkt" to ".ss" if only a ".ss" file is
>   present. So, you can migrate from ".ss" to ".rkt" at either the
>   definition or use of a module, independent of the other side.

I like short extensions. So I prefer .rkt over .racket. But I won't
fork if we go with something else :P

>
> _________________________________________________
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-dev
>



-- 
Jay McCarthy <jay at cs.byu.edu>
Assistant Professor / Brigham Young University
http://teammccarthy.org/jay

"The glory of God is Intelligence" - D&C 93