[racket] The value of a language

Sending these responses to the group.

On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Nick Shelley <nickmshelley at gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks for the link, I should definitely go through that.
>
> However, after quickly looking through the problem set, it seems like
> these are problems made for features, not features solving real problems.
> It's easy to say that we have powerful macros and you don't, but until
> someone sees how they can apply it to what they are doing, they won't want
> it.
>
> Also, I can know and understand a feature in and out, but maybe never
> realize where I can apply it until I see examples. However, since I don't
> understand any features that well, maybe some of you experts can say how
> easy it is to apply language features to real problems after gaining
> sufficient understanding of the feature or whether examples would have been
> or were helpful to you even after understanding a feature.
>
>
> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 4:11 PM, Tom Maynard <tom at maynard.com> wrote:
>
>>  On 05/09/2012 04:50 PM, Nick Shelley wrote:
>>
>> a list (maybe on a wiki or something) of real problems that were solved
>>
>>
>> In the Clojure sphere, what you're talking about is 4clojure<http://www.4clojure.com/>.
>> There's no reason a Racketeer couldn't work through the problem set ... and
>> since it would be a solo effort (no community support or published
>> answers), you'd be thrown on the available resources heavily, and probably
>> learn quite a bit more.
>>
>> OTOH, a Racket version of the same thing ... or a developing 4clojure
>> community of Racket solvers ... would indeed be a terrific resource.
>>
>> Tom.
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20120509/85e100de/attachment.html>