racket-binfmt
frog
| racket-binfmt | frog | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | |
| 11 | 914 | |
| - | - | |
| 4.9 | 4.3 | |
| 5 months ago | 5 months ago | |
| Racket | Racket | |
| - | - |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
racket-binfmt
-
Racket: The Lisp for the Modern Day
Racket internalizes Extra-linguistic mechanisms https://felleisen.org/matthias/manifesto/sec_intern.html
Also the fact that various DSLs can inter-op with each other directly, so that you can use something like a binary parser description, as if it was just another Racket library. For example this description of the format https://github.com/Bogdanp/racket-binfmt/blob/master/binfmt-..., is directly included in another file as a regular library https://github.com/Bogdanp/racket-binfmt/blob/master/binfmt-...
I agree that startup time is not a winning aspect of Racket. My naive understanding is because Racket is not a direct bytecode interpreter like CPython, but actually has to run a compile step to native code, and doing that for programs + their required libraries necessarily takes at least a couple of hundred milliseconds even before anything can start running, while CPython can pretty much start executing from the get go.
frog
What are some alternatives?
Energy-Languages - The complete set of tools for energy consumption analysis of programming languages, using Computer Language Benchmark Game
scribble