<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div><br></div><div>Yes, that's the conclusion they come to but did they act on it? </div><div><br></div><br><div><div>On Feb 18, 2013, at 5:44 PM, Robby Findler wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr">The discussion on that page seems to be pretty well argued for the Right Thing, namely that Racket is a separate language.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 4:27 PM, Asumu Takikawa <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:asumu@ccs.neu.edu" target="_blank">asumu@ccs.neu.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="im">On 2013-02-18 12:47:21 +0000, Tim Brown wrote:<br> >    I've just had a poke around and seen that Racket is considered a dialect<br> >    of scheme, and there are many tasks that have the scheme entry marked as<br> >    "works with racket", but not in a way that shows the task is implemented<br> >    as a Racket example. (I've just looked at Category:Programming_Languages,<br> >    and Racket isn't even listed).<br> <br> </div>It used to be listed as a separate language actually. There was some<br> dicussion here:<br>   <a href="http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Category_talk:Racket" target="_blank">http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Category_talk:Racket</a><br> <br> I'm not sure what the policy is, if there is one.<br> <br> Cheers,<br> Asumu<br> ____________________<br>   Racket Users list:<br>   <a href="http://lists.racket-lang.org/users" target="_blank">http://lists.racket-lang.org/users</a><br> </blockquote></div><br></div> ____________________<br>  Racket Users list:<br>  <a href="http://lists.racket-lang.org/users">http://lists.racket-lang.org/users</a><br></blockquote></div><br></body></html>