kasdeya
kasdeya
I’m about ready to give up on Racket. the lack of LSP features and the often-unhelpful error reporting make it pretty difficult to work with - especially as a project gets more complex, and especially when refactoring (it’s so labor-intensive to track down what all broke because I changed a function’s signature)
Typed Racket seems to fix a lot of these problems, but creates so many more of its own - like the inability to use a ton of libraries that I had been relying on up to this point, including threading which is such an amazing threading library T_T
so I’m not sure what I’m going to learn next. I might go back to Python and learn some GUI programming instead - and remake my clicker game there. Python isn’t as nifty as Racket with its macros and Lisp syntax and its amazing threading library. but Python works incredibly well for me, has really good tooling, and I know it very well
1
2
6
I still think that the concept of a Lisp language is incredibly elegant and powerful, and I think it’s such a shame that every popular Lisp I’ve tried has been so unpleasant to work with. and that even some of the more niche Lisps like Janet have serious fatal flaws that need to be addressed. I don’t think Lisps have to be this way - I think this probably comes from the decades of baggage that these languages are still carrying around from the 1960’s
and I hope that someday a Lisp will be created that isn’t afraid to throw that baggage away and start from scratch, with modern language features, good documentation, and static analysis as a first-class feature. in the meantime I might use Fennel when I want to write Lua, just for fun and to remind myself that it exists. but otherwise I guess I’ll stick to Python
1
1
8
Mx. Chara Aznable (they/them) of Pnictogen
mxchara@seattle.pink@kasdeya this is, I admit, why Dylan caught my eye back in the early 1990s. but I never seriously worked with Dylan and I have no idea how it stacks up in comparison to other Lisp spinoffs
1
0
1