[racket] Adding raw string syntax

I just want to suggest the idea that it's positive for the promotion
of Racket to have many usage examples, even if it's stuff not
particularly easy or special to do in Racket.

Something I think we've all seen with technology marketing (yeah, I
said the m-word): When I've built something, there's a natural
tendency to focus on what's-new-in-this-version or
what-makes-us-better-than-the-competition. That's what's most
interesting to me, to gatekeepers, and even to some subset of
customers. But many potential customers are interested in the basic
story, including all the bits that are old and unremarkable to me.

Plus in the case of Racket it might help to have more mundane
examples, rather than fewer. Such examples help convey: "See, you can
do practical stuff in Racket just like in your blub language. There's
all this other power and expressiveness waiting for you to try, when
you're ready. But Racket isn't only for PL researchers. Oh and don't
worry, you won't need Leibniz to printf."

On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Eli Barzilay <eli at barzilay.org> wrote:
> 5 hours ago, Joan Arnaldich wrote:
>>
>> Done. I added a section at the end on the @form syntax, and a note
>> at the beggining so that people can skip the whole article if they
>> just want to get the functionality.
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>> If the tutorials section in the article section is to stay, then
>> I'll add this one here, which I think is far more interesting than
>> mine:
>>
>> http://matt.might.net/articles/implementing-a-programming-language/
>
> Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>>
>> But Matt's page is just a discussion of interpreters.
>> That's a rather different notion of implementing a
>> language. You could do so in asm, no real tools needed.
>
> Yeah -- when building an interpreter Racket does have its advantages,
> but at that level it's pretty close to many other functional
> languages.  In any case, it looks like someone else saw that and
> removed the entry.
>
>
>> Speaking of the article, after Asumu's mail I started to contribute
>> a little bit.  I was planning to focus on the practical side of
>> Racket, so I added a brief section on this. I would like to add a
>> link at the end of the section pointing at a new wikipedia page with
>> examples on how Racket can be used in different application domains,
>> and to show some of the different languages / paradigms available (a
>> bit like the Haskell page does in the features section)... the
>> problem is that it is hard to come up with better examples than the
>> ones already at racket-lang.org, so could I use some of those
>> (always with the reference)?.  I think more wikipedia readers will
>> get to see the examples if they're in a regular wikipedia page
>> rather than having to click to an external link and then browse back
>> and forth and click on the question mark for an explanation.
>
> That sounds like a very good idea -- not only include them, but also
> add some descriptions.  To get all the example sources in a convenient
> way, you can just look in the source file that has them:
>
>  http://git.racket-lang.org/plt/blob/HEAD:/collects/meta/web/www/index.rkt
>
> --
>          ((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/users
>



On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Eli Barzilay <eli at barzilay.org> wrote:
> 5 hours ago, Joan Arnaldich wrote:
>>
>> Done. I added a section at the end on the @form syntax, and a note
>> at the beggining so that people can skip the whole article if they
>> just want to get the functionality.
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>> If the tutorials section in the article section is to stay, then
>> I'll add this one here, which I think is far more interesting than
>> mine:
>>
>> http://matt.might.net/articles/implementing-a-programming-language/
>
> Matthias Felleisen wrote:
>>
>> But Matt's page is just a discussion of interpreters.
>> That's a rather different notion of implementing a
>> language. You could do so in asm, no real tools needed.
>
> Yeah -- when building an interpreter Racket does have its advantages,
> but at that level it's pretty close to many other functional
> languages.  In any case, it looks like someone else saw that and
> removed the entry.
>
>
>> Speaking of the article, after Asumu's mail I started to contribute
>> a little bit.  I was planning to focus on the practical side of
>> Racket, so I added a brief section on this. I would like to add a
>> link at the end of the section pointing at a new wikipedia page with
>> examples on how Racket can be used in different application domains,
>> and to show some of the different languages / paradigms available (a
>> bit like the Haskell page does in the features section)... the
>> problem is that it is hard to come up with better examples than the
>> ones already at racket-lang.org, so could I use some of those
>> (always with the reference)?.  I think more wikipedia readers will
>> get to see the examples if they're in a regular wikipedia page
>> rather than having to click to an external link and then browse back
>> and forth and click on the question mark for an explanation.
>
> That sounds like a very good idea -- not only include them, but also
> add some descriptions.  To get all the example sources in a convenient
> way, you can just look in the source file that has them:
>
>  http://git.racket-lang.org/plt/blob/HEAD:/collects/meta/web/www/index.rkt
>
> --
>          ((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/users
>