Racket Is an Acceptable Python

Re:Racket Is an Acceptable Python by darkpuma on Thursday July 11, 2019 @07:03PM (#20416696)

Yeah I don't use racket's class system on a regular basis for anything other than racket/gui. It's not so much that I find myself unable to do things with it; it's just that it's one of the cases where racket seems dull and uninspired. If it weren't single dispatch, I don't think I (and others) would avoid it so much.

No offense to the design team intended, I'm sure they had different priorities for which single dispatch made sense.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Racket Is an Acceptable Python by neilv on Thursday July 11, 2019 @08:03PM (#20417019)

I agree. Almost all class systems now are rehashes of things that are useful and were once very exciting, but now you've seen them in tens of languages.

When you encounter yet another one, learning it is usually a matter of seeing which set of semantics it provides (probably all of which you've seen before), and the exact way they do it.

Though one nice feature they included with Racket's `class` library, which was unusual (but not new) at the time, is mixins: https://docs.racket-lang.org/guide/classes.html#%28part._.Mi...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Racket Is an Acceptable Python by darkpuma on Thursday July 11, 2019 @08:15PM (#20417070)

Mixins are pretty cool. I was playing around with 'framework's editor mixins a while ago and found it to be a pretty interesting system.

[ Parent | on HN ]