[racket] FW: Racket documentation for web development is just awful!

On Dec 19, 2011, at 6:03 PM, Gerry Weaver wrote:

> Hi Noob,
> 
> I believe I mentioned before that I had some trouble with the web development docs myself. However, after thinking it over a bit, I decided to invest more time in learning the language. It occurred to me that in order to really take advantage of the web server, I would need to become a lot more familiar with the advanced language concepts it is based on.

Half the people I deal with argue that they don't want to use Racket because it is not advanced enough; the other half argue that it is too advanced. I am forever trying to interpret these observations without drawing pessimistic conclusions.

> I'm finding that as I gain knowledge and experience, my ability to understand the docs improves. The point I'm trying to make here is that without the language foundation, it is just magical code. This is true with or without a beginners guide. I would actually vote for a more thorough treatment of the language itself documentation wise.

I feel more informed by the Racket group than any other, despite the subject of this thread. I use Racket partly because The Racket Guide is so good; it is even interesting to read. The Racket Reference has the remainder of the details required for completing software that pays the bills. Those two sources are the fish, and the often mentioned Racket-oriented texts are for learning how to fish. I admit that I don't do web programming, so I have no opinion of the web docs.

> How would one hope to use a continuation based server effectively without a thorough understanding continuations? Isn't it these advanced language features that attracted us to Racket/Scheme in the first place? At this point in time, I'm not completely sure the additional web server docs wouldn't just serve to short circuit the language learning process. Many thanks for the patience of those who waited for me to realize this ;-)
> 
> I think Neil makes an interesting point. It seems like Racket would appeal more to systems programmers coming from languages like C/C++ than it would to the Java/Python/Ruby/PHP/Perl/etc. crowd. Racket in general has a much higher price of entry than your average scripting language.

I don't agree. Racket could be taught in a manner which leads to programming like typical programmers in those other languages you mention. The apparently higher price of entry is for programming in better ways. Programmers in my lab occasionally admit that they wrote something in Racket, but actually wrote it like they would in their normal language. The price of entry for that is within the deviation of any of those languages.

> I mean no offense to web developers. I just think Racket/Scheme requires quite a bit more effort and commitment than most would be willing to make.
> 

I find that the programming community is loaded with people who work hard, but don't want to learn more. To them, Racket is like cod liver oil in a soda shoppe.

Have as much fun as I do! ... and note that cod liver oil has vitamins, but soda is bad for your teeth.

rac

> Thanks,
> Gerry
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Racket Noob" <racketnoob at hotmail.com>
> To: users at racket-lang.org
> Date: 12/19/11 17:37
> Subject: [racket] FW: Racket documentation for web development is just awful!
> 
>  
> 
> Of course I care! 
> I love racket and deeply respect all of you . But , I'm afraid that if you go this way , Racket remain just another never used " academic " language . 
>   
> Community is too hermetic and self-sufficient . L et's take only RacketCon's videos as example: you, boys are so much in your own world that you do not realize how important it was to publish them on time . 
>  
>  
> Subject: Re: [racket] Racket documentation for web development is just awful! 
> From: matthias at ccs.neu.edu 
> Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 17:38:00 -0500 
> CC: users at racket-lang.org 
> To: racketnoob at hotmail.com 
> 
>  
>  
> Is your goal to turn off every single core and non-core member on this list? Or do you actually care?  
> 
>  
> 
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> _________________________________________________
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
> _________________________________________________
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20111219/75001b28/attachment.html>