namekuseijin

poor bipolar

are people still learning python? eons ago when I last looked at it, people were still making this very question LOL

it's the curse of open source software: as long as the source is out there, people with legacy software will continue updating it. Perl 6 was long in the making, never made any real inroads because all of its audience was already readily invested in perl 5.

it only really works with commercial tools, because people will whine much but eventually bend over and buy Microsoft's or Oracle's latest bloated money grabber. Because there's no option, right?

right, most people are pigs

I'm a dog and only eat bone marrow...

a giant turkey, indeed

probably even the motion was likely very similar to that of birds... you know, those careful steps one after the other of chicken...

racket is a superset of scheme. I write perfectly valid scheme code and run in racket even with the #lang racket tag... now, let's not get started on RxRS compatibility...

its features are comparable to old Lisps from the 70's, prior to Scheme and Common Lisp. Nothing really new here at all and lots of old bugs passing for features.

it's actually a very small vocal minority who hates microsoft. They hate microsoft because microsoft means ubiquitous standardized flatten programming environments the way managers like, with sheeple programmers properly strapped and assembling programs from paid frameworks.

Microsoft Research is kinda like a country club for retired compsci laureates...

that's bad assembly-style pseudo-code and thinking. Lisp favors higher-level, functional pseudo-code that readily runs as is!

like in scheme: (write (let for ((i 0) (s 0)) (if (> i 100) s (for (+ 1 i) (+ i s)))))

why would you care for those a, b, or s variables in the first place when all you want is the sum? The above expression writes the sum as computed by a recursive approach using lexical bindings.

you may of course abstract it away into a function: (define (for from to doit result) (if (> from to) result (for (+ 1 from) to doit (doit from result))))

and use it: (write (let ((a 0) (b 100)) (for a b + 0)))

I didn't even need macros yet!

Yeah, there'll come a time when to build systems all you need is a bunch of people talking to reach a consensus: how much to pay for a third party to write it for them.

oops, it seems it already happens today...

I wish there was a language called harmless which common folk could use to express common thought without any fear. It would go like this:

do this do this and that and that too do this amen

No branching nor decision trees as not to confuse common folk. Now programming is a socially acceptable activity!

Typed Racket combines all the inconvenience of type declarations with all the performance provided by a dynamic language.