Re:Future of Racket
by dTal on Wednesday August 07, 2019 @09:22AM
(#20634440)
I feel like there's some paragraphs missing in this post between "I'm concerned the change won't help grow the community" and "I'll no longer learn or have fun in this community". He doesn't explicitly say how he expects his relationship with Racket to change, or why. He's implying, though not even outright stating, that he's distancing from Racket because of Matthew Flatt's proposal. That's begging for further explanation. Mere proposals don't warrant this sort of reaction. Racket is hardly a stranger to radical proposals. What's going on behind the scenes that's so serious as to warrant a post like this? Why, in short, the vagueposting drama?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
He didn't rehash arguments that he had made on the Racket mailing list in his blog post. Here is one example: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/racket-users/vN_1uUJZn...
I'm not talking about his specific objections to the proposal. I'm talking about why those objections, which seem to be taking place in the context of a reasonable discussion where everyone's opinion is heard, have led him to the conclusion that he will no longer enjoy participating in the Racket community.
This is a key line from his post:
"Also to be fair, if you have some mileage on your odometer, your pattern-recognition machinery will quickly assign high probabilities to various outcomes."
His combination of personality and experience is leading him to draw conclusions about where Racket2 is headed that is causing him to press pause on using (and contributing to) Racket. I had a similar reaction (described in this post: https://www.travishinkelman.com/post/exploring-scheme-implem...).
It seems that you are not assigning as high of probability to the outcomes that Greg is concerned about. Or you are not as concerned about those outcomes.