The Racket repository (by racket)

Racket Alternatives

Similar projects and alternatives to racket

NOTE: The number of mentions on this list indicates mentions on common posts plus user suggested alternatives. Hence, a higher number means a better racket alternative or higher similarity.

racket reviews and mentions

Posts with mentions or reviews of racket. We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives and similar projects. The last one was on 2023-11-07.
  • Ask HN: Does anyone Lisp without Emacs?
    4 projects | news.ycombinator.com | 7 Nov 2023
    Racket (https://racket-lang.org) has an IDE (DrRacket) which isn't EMACS. ARC (which powers hacker news) is (was?) written in Racket.
  • Ask HN: What is the most suitable Scheme implementation to learn today?
    2 projects | news.ycombinator.com | 24 Aug 2023
    I'd checkout Racket: https://racket-lang.org/ It's got a nice UI for starting out and getting good error reporting. It's also well documented.
    2 projects | news.ycombinator.com | 24 Aug 2023
    I'd suggest Racket (https://racket-lang.org) which is a batteries-included language environment that includes scheme and has a lot of high-quality documentation.

    Guile (https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/) isn't quite as learner-focused but is another great choice.

  • What Programming Languages are Best for Kids?
    3 projects | /r/programming | 19 Aug 2023
    How did I get to the bottom of the page and not ONE person has recommended racket?
  • Racket Frustrates Me
    3 projects | news.ycombinator.com | 30 Jun 2023
    My info is a bit out of date, but I'll try to go through big block of concerns...

    > Do I want to iterate every 18 hours waiting for the pkgs.racket-lang.org build server to finish building my package? Then do it again because the build failed (my mistake, but now my users have to wait until later that week…)?

    ( https://pkgs.racket-lang.org/ is one way of sharing an open source package, through a public repository analogous to PyPI. There is a small delay upon uploading a new package/version, because the server builds the package, runs the package's tests, formats the package's documentation, etc.)

    I don't know why it would take 18 hours, and I don't see a bug report linked.

    Maybe the author was just doing a commit to their own random GitHub repo, without telling the Racket packages repository, and so waited for the packages repository to do a periodic scan of all third-party packages' random Git/Web sources for new versions? (I'd always go to the Racket package repo Web UI, and push a button of some kind there, and the new version would go through promptly.)

    > Do I want to worry about packaging and deploying Racket code or could I simply do the same in most other languages without any fuss? I tried packaging Racket in Nix, it did not go well.

    What didn't go well? Racket runs on a wide variety of systems. I once experimentally packaged it for plastic OpenWrt routers, and it was straightforward. https://www.neilvandyke.org/racket-openwrt/

    > Do I want to invest trust in a programming platform that considers umask of optional importance? https://github.com/racket/racket/issues/4511

    That was a helpful bug report, and looks like Matthew Flatt followed up on it promptly, and the bug report even got Matthias Felleisen's interest.

    Then, given Racket's emphasis on cross-platform and backward-compatibility, Matthew's decision to add the semantics support without breaking production for all of the existing users. That seems reasonable and predictable to me.

    > Do I want to force users to adopt an application written in a language that uses at the very least 122M resident memory on my workstation? Or do I consider Python or Guile which both use less than 10M?

    I don't know how the author is running their code, so this might be the best Racket can do with the code, or maybe...

    DrRacket (IDE) can run code with very heavy debugging instrumentation, and you can also do similar things from the command line.

    DrRacket also has a feature that limits memory usage to a specified amount, IIRC defaulting to 128MB, which is great for alerting programmers on workstations with multi-gigabytes of RAM that they might be doing something inefficient.

    Code can be run from source files (silently compiling/recompiling on demand and caching for later runs), from the compiled form, or into a more packaged form (which IIRC does some tree-shaking).

    What libraries you pull in can also mean surprises (e.g., I see a later comment by author in which they mention a third-party package having inappropriate dependencies).

    If you want to run in really tight memory, that will affect how you program, and will include an awareness of the garbage collector.

    But also, small executable size probably isn't a top priority for Racket.

    > Do I want to force users to package Racket which itself has no clear custody of its build inputs - can you produce a Racket tarball yourself that is exactly like the one on the release site? Who knows what’s in those tarballs!

    I suspect the author is talking here about what's now called "reproducible builds".

    > Do I want to invest in a community without a mechanism to apply community feedback constructively? RFCs?

    The author got Matthew Flatt and even Matthias Felleisen giving prompt attention to the bug report they linked.

    They'll find similar responsiveness on the mailing list.

    > Do I want to write 4x the code (in Racket) because I forgot my secret move was actually all the pypi packages that I took for granted in Python?

    Depends what you need to do. The normal case, with programmers who are performing at normal levels and with normal practices is just to using PyPI (or NPM, or Cargo, or whatever), and bang out a solution to a normal problem.

    But if you need to do something unusual, or you have programmers who are super-effective and can even judiciously bang out that reusable code as needed (better than the reused packages), then consider getting out of their way -- whether they just do it in Python or NodeJS, or they say this will go better in Racket, Rust, or something more exotic.

    > Do I want to wonder about what was meant by “contributions welcome” when most of the core racket codebases at best have a README, at worst have no contributor documentation?

    Documentation is one of Racket's strengths. From near the top of https://docs.racket-lang.org/ , see, for example, the document "Building, Distributing, and Contributing to Racket".

    > Do I want to invest in a platform where leadership is building Rombus a.k.a. Racket2 instead of focusing on making core Racket just that much better and easier to adopt? (see also: Future of Racket.)

    That's a good question. Racket is solid for production, has features that other languages still haven't discovered or done as well, and the author saw the prompt attention to their bug report. (The Rhombus thing has been going on much longer.)

    > Do I want to wait 10+ minutes for my package to build in CI because some other package maintainer decided to pull in racket or racket-doc (which pulls in the entire big Racket distribution)?

    Talk to the developer of that third-party package?

    > Do I want to ship multi-gigabyte docker images because of the above kitchen sink package?

    Talk to the developer of that third-party package, and there might be additional things you can do.

    > Do I want to deal with being blocked due to not understanding how to use the less understood features of racket such as continuations, syntax-parse/syntax-case macros, units/signatures? You’ll want to know about all these things to write effective Racket code.

    You'll need to understand first-class continuations to work on all the Racket internals as a compiler developer. But I don't recall ever seeing a non-internals use of that.

    For the syntax extension mechanisms, you can learn that as-needed and at your own pace, because it's for things that most languages can't do (and does it better than languages that can). And you can definitely learn them incrementally, and start with the higher-level forms, which might just do what you need.

    Units/signatures are ancient, and you probably don't need to use them. Just use the very nice module system (including submodules), and then decide whether you need more.

    > Do I want to add business risk by writing a product in Racket? Does anybody work as an industry Racket coder at all? Would I struggle to hire more talent?

    It's probably needless additional risk/unknown to use for business unless you have more or more people who are able to dig in and figure out technical stuff without Stack Overflow. (Though there are helpful forums, but you'll need to rise to the occasion more often.)

    And one of the the secret weapons of beloved fringe languages/platforms is that they attract those mythical "10x" programmers on basis of technical/aesthetic/community merits rather than employability, so there's more of them than there are great jobs using Racket...

    > Do I…. yeah there’s more but let’s move on ;)

    OK, skipping...

    > Where did the racket-money mailing list go?


    It's quiet most of the time, but picks up when a new person joins or there's a question/idea.

    > Or really all the production users? I only found one production user.

    There's more than that, including doing spectacular productivity and importance, but there's not many.

    One thing the author of the blog post might be realizing is that the Racket professors are generally super-capable, they support production users like most professors couldn't, they'll provide technical support to any random person around the world. They'd love more commercial uptake, but that's been far from their top priority.

  • Building a Programming Language in Twenty-Four Hours
    2 projects | news.ycombinator.com | 5 Jun 2023
    I think building a programming language (or DSL to be exact) for a problem is one the features of Racket [1]. I once watched a presentation by Dr Felleisen and got this idea.

    [1]: https://racket-lang.org/

  • Getting Started with Goblins
    2 projects | dev.to | 31 May 2023
    Before anything else, make sure you have DrRacket installed and the IDE opened. You will need to install Goblins by going to File > Package Manager and type "goblins" in the Package Source box and hit enter to install the library.
  • Discussion Thread
    2 projects | /r/neoliberal | 27 May 2023
  • Navigating the Github repository?
    2 projects | /r/Racket | 6 Apr 2023
    I'd like to read the source code for a procedure in rnrs/base-6 (to see how it handles inexact numbers), but I can't seem to find the appropriate file or directory at https://github.com/racket/racket. A Web search didn't turn up anything useful. Any ideas?
  • Tips for CS011 and CS10B?
    3 projects | /r/ucr | 30 Mar 2023
    https://racket-lang.org/ (Racket) is pretty cool for recursion (see: tail recursive) - it's also a functional language which is pretty cool.
  • A note from our sponsor - #<SponsorshipServiceOld:0x00007f0f9b322c90>
    www.saashub.com | 8 Dec 2023
    SaaSHub helps you find the best software and product alternatives Learn more →


Basic racket repo stats
about 4 hours ago
SaaSHub - Software Alternatives and Reviews
SaaSHub helps you find the best software and product alternatives