[racket] Rosetta Code

Yes, that's the conclusion they come to but did they act on it? 


On Feb 18, 2013, at 5:44 PM, Robby Findler wrote:

> The discussion on that page seems to be pretty well argued for the Right Thing, namely that Racket is a separate language.
> 
> 
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 4:27 PM, Asumu Takikawa <asumu at ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
> On 2013-02-18 12:47:21 +0000, Tim Brown wrote:
> >    I've just had a poke around and seen that Racket is considered a dialect
> >    of scheme, and there are many tasks that have the scheme entry marked as
> >    "works with racket", but not in a way that shows the task is implemented
> >    as a Racket example. (I've just looked at Category:Programming_Languages,
> >    and Racket isn't even listed).
> 
> It used to be listed as a separate language actually. There was some
> dicussion here:
>   http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Category_talk:Racket
> 
> I'm not sure what the policy is, if there is one.
> 
> Cheers,
> Asumu
> ____________________
>   Racket Users list:
>   http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
> 
> ____________________
>  Racket Users list:
>  http://lists.racket-lang.org/users

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20130218/e3920ce7/attachment.html>