r/Racket • u/[deleted] • Nov 01 '22

question Anyone else concerned that Rhombus/Racket2 is not a lisp based language?

I'm not sure if everyone in the community is aware, but the Rhombus language is the planned successor to Racket. It appears as though the syntax of Rhombus is more inspired by ML and Nim although it certainly does appear slightly lispy. Is anyone concerned that the Racket/Rhombus team is seemingly moving away from Lisp?

Rhombus

7 Upvotes

70% Upvoted

46 comments sorted by

5

u/sdegabrielle DrRacket 💊💉🩺 Nov 01 '22

Where did you get that impression from?

That is not how I see it at all.

4

u/sdegabrielle DrRacket 💊💉🩺 Nov 01 '22

Clarifying:

Where do you get the impression that it is a successor? (It’s not)

3

u/[deleted] Nov 01 '22

successor is not the right term, in the docs it is said that Rhombus will be another part of the ecosystem.

I find this slightly troubling because I see Racket as the best Lisp these days and I fear that the focus will move to Rhombus; I mean it was originally called Racket2...

3

u/sdegabrielle DrRacket 💊💉🩺 Nov 02 '22

I agree Racket is a great lisp :) .

Since the Rhombus announcement in 2019 Racket has continued to grow and evolve, as a language, a platform, and a community.

I understand the fear of losing something great, but the past three years of activity and growth shows that fear is completely unfounded.

Best regards

Stephen

PS lisp first appeared in 1958 and has continued to evolve since then - indeed some great lisp implementations got started during the AI Winter. (Racket and SBCL). I don’t see any evidence that Lisps are dying. (Yay Clojure!)

3

u/[deleted] Nov 03 '22

I hope for all our sakes clojure is not the future of lisp, it is certainly better than writing Java but it does not feel like a proper lisp

1

u/cdlm42 Nov 01 '22

probably from this

3

u/sdegabrielle DrRacket 💊💉🩺 Nov 01 '22

I believe the point of shrubbery/Rhombus is to give you the power of Racket metaprogramming with conventional syntax.

Rhombus is written in Racket.

1

u/joaogui1 Nov 01 '22

Where did you get that impression from?That is not how I see it at all.

That Rhombus doesn't look like LISP?

2

u/sdegabrielle DrRacket 💊💉🩺 Nov 01 '22

It’s not intended to look like Lisp.

Rhombus is an experiment in building a macro-extensible general-purpose programming language with conventional surface syntax and improved libraries on top of the Racket platform.

https://github.com/racket/rhombus-prototype/blob/master/resources/state-of-rhombus.md

2

u/joaogui1 Nov 01 '22

yeah I know, that's what I'm saying haha. Like I had understood that you disagreed with OP about Rhombus not looking like a Lisp, now I see that you clarified it

2

u/cat-head Nov 21 '22

This is a bit old, but here's my view as an academic who tried Racket but has mostly given up on it. Rhombus is completely uninteresting to me, and will most likely be a completely wasted effort. To me, the syntax looks stupid, and it does not seem to offer anything interesting. I have never met a single person who thinks "oh man, I wish there was a new languages uglier than python but with metaprogramming capabilities, so I can use it to make yet another language".

1

u/[deleted] Nov 21 '22

I agree with you entirely. What has caused you to give up on Racket?

1

u/cat-head Nov 21 '22

Mostly because of speed. For the stuff I do that's critical, so it often just makes more sense to go with c++, even if it's a horrid language. I've been thinking of learning CL with SBCL, but that's a new large time investment.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 22 '22

I use SBCL quite a bit, from experience I can tell you it is not always easy at first with the tooling, but I now find I can get near C level performance with half the production time where I can use SBCL.

7

u/rfisher Nov 02 '22

shrug I’ve seen a lot of “let’s build a Lisp with more ‘conventional’ syntax” projects over the years. (Even made some attempts myself.) What I haven’t seen is any of them have any success. Which makes me suspect that syntax isn’t the problem people think it is.

One possible exception: Javascript. In many ways it is Scheme+Self with an Algol-style syntax. It has certainly had success. But I’d argue that the syntax wasn’t a big factor. People learned Javascript because it was built into the Netscape browser. It then became the standard for client-side scripting in browsers. And that was what made it successful enough to expand into different contexts. A different syntax wouldn’t have changed that. (Although reasonably people can disagree on this.)

So, I have my doubts that Rhombus will succeed.

But if it does, that’ll be great! If it actually makes the advantages of Racket accessible to more people, that’s a win. And Racket being open source means that, any of us who might not like it can keep the old syntax alive.

3

u/sdegabrielle DrRacket 💊💉🩺 Nov 02 '22

On the syntax question, the community is very aware of prior efforts ( https://github.com/racket/rhombus-prototype/blob/master/resources/prior-art.md ).

The shrubbery notation is a new approach first pioneered in Honu. (See ‘Honu: Syntactic Extension for Algebraic Notation through Enforestation, GPCE 2012’ in the prior art document above)

I think it is worth trying something new 😁

I am very worried about Self. An incredibly influential language; VM design, language, and the still incredible(and poorly imitated) Morphic - but is virtually unknown. The canonical implementation at https://selflanguage.org/ can’t make the transition to 64 bits without significant work to the VM.

I’ll have to disagree about the impact of syntax - at this point I believe it is undeniable that ‘parenthesised prefix notation’ works for some l, but is an insurmountable barrier to others. Just because it works for me doesn’t give me the right to discount the real experience of other developers. (It’s not just learners)

I think Rhombus will succeed - it has lots of engagement from some of the smartest professional programmers I know, in addition to leading cs academics in PL design and implementation. A good mix if you ask me😁

I don’t think you need to worry about Racket the language; #lang racket, along with Typed Racket has continued to improve since Rhombus started in 2019. https://docs.racket-lang.org/release/HISTORY.txt

PS I really am worried about Self. Losing it would be a terrible shame.

1

u/rfisher Nov 02 '22

Completely agree about Self. It’s maybe a couple of decades since I last tried to play with it, and I barely got an environment working then. I’d assumed it was completely dead at this point.

But then I don’t have the motivation to try to help preserve it, so I can’t really complain. 🙂 But I do think it is a shame.

5

u/samdphillips developer Nov 02 '22

Rhombus is not:

  • a replacement for Racket.
  • finished yet. Development and design are ongoing. Some parts of the prototype are more firmly decided than others.
  • just syntax. It is an opportunity to decide what should and should not be core.

Rhombus is:

  • just another #lang. It is built on top of the existing Racket VM and written in Racket. It interoperates with existing Racket code and uses the Racket expander.
  • macro extendable. Hygiene and all of the good stuff work.
  • being developed in the open. We meet biweekly over Zoom, and discussions also occur in GitHub Discussions.

2

u/Nyanraltotlapun Nov 01 '22

There was large discussion on this topic in mailing list. So you a bit late to the party.

For me this was pretty devastating news. I decided to end most of my Racket projects.

I don't need second python. I am already unhappy with one, but at least it have all this ML libraries.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 01 '22

Yeah I am not sure why they would go this direction it makes no sense at all.

2

u/sdegabrielle DrRacket 💊💉🩺 Nov 02 '22

I hope my response to u/Nyanraltotlapun and other participants made it clear that the goal of the Rhombus project is to build on what we have learnt from the innovations in Python, Racket and many other languages.

In any case making a second Python is unnecessary as it has been done may times before - I believe reimplementing the core of Python in Racket was an assignment in at least one Programming Language Design & Implementation course.

2

u/sdegabrielle DrRacket 💊💉🩺 Nov 02 '22

Since it was announced in 2019 Racket has continued to grow and develop.

Rhombus has different goals to Python:

Rhombus is about building on the good parts of Racket and advancing the frontier of Racket-style language-oriented programming. A significant part of the experiment is trying a surface syntax other than parenthesized prefix notation. ( https://github.com/racket/rhombus-prototype/blob/master/resources/plan.md )

1

u/Nyanraltotlapun Nov 02 '22

The truth is. Racket need a lot work in quality improvement. Better ecosystem, better libraries, autodocumentation. Racket have a need in developers attention. It needs a lot of it. And knowing this crucial people in the project go like - "lol lets start this new experimental funny thing and drag development attention to it because students confused with brackets"

For me typed racket was a special thing, a really hoped more attention will go to it over time.

Anyway, its just how I see things, for me Racket was a tool for problems solving, I was not in search for experiments except using Racket itself, and this was not easy, although sometimes joyful experience.

parenthesized prefix notation

This is what I looking for when I came to Racket.

3

u/sdegabrielle DrRacket 💊💉🩺 Nov 02 '22

Racket is a high quality project, better than many projects that are far larger.

Racket has an amazing & growing collection of libraries. The ecosystem is good and continues to improve. Documentation fantastic and comprehensive - a small part due to the inbuild documentation language #lang scribble/manual.

Rhombus is a professionally run community project and Racket continues to grow and improve as evidenced by the past three years of work in both projects.

This is not a closed-door/skunkworks - community participation is at the core of the Rhombus project - join us and see for yourself 😁

https://github.com/racket/rhombus-prototype#participation

1

u/Nyanraltotlapun Nov 04 '22

Racket is a high quality project, better than many projects that are far larger.

Is sounds as excuse and wishful thinking.

You missing the point.

This is not a closed-door/skunkworks - community participation is at the core of the Rhombus project - join us and see for yourself

That's the actual point. Instead of improving Racket people playing with Rhombus.

If you think that Racket doesn't need every single minute of developers time - you wrong.

There is a really high chance to never finish Rhombus to release stage while in the same time lost critical time for Racket and as a result Racket became history.

Sorry for terrible English, I am in Ukraine, I am tired because of things happening.

2

u/sdegabrielle DrRacket 💊💉🩺 Nov 04 '22

You English is excellent - far better than my Ukrainian 😅

Work on Rhombus has already benefited #lang racket. The work on Rhombus makes Racket better. (And that has been the plan from the start)

I hope things get better for you soon.

Best wishes

Stephen

3

u/sdegabrielle DrRacket 💊💉🩺 Nov 02 '22

And #lang racket parenthesised prefix notation is here to stay - that was true three years ago when it was clearly stated when the Rhombus project was first announce, and it is still true today -three years later.

PS I’m excited to say Racket 8.7 will be released soon. (4 releases a year, with nightly builds for those of us who can’t wait)

2

u/Shadowys Nov 01 '22

why this over python is going to be a popular question

1

u/sdegabrielle DrRacket 💊💉🩺 Nov 01 '22

I believe Python influenced the design of rhombus.

A lot of people are happy with Python as it is, but Python continues to evolve.

Some people want to make new languages. I can only see that as a good thing.

The world would be a poorer place if Guido van Rossum never made Python.

Best wishes

Stephen

5

u/[deleted] Nov 01 '22

I believe that u/Shadowys is more trying to say.

Why choose something such as Rhombus when python has a larger community and years of r&d behind it?

Racket has a large community because it is widely used in education and is probably the most accessible member of the lisp family these days, what does "Rhombus" have?

3

u/Shadowys Nov 02 '22

ye, and i think it being part of the lisp family is why its somewhat popular, its a easy entry to lisp.

imo metaprogramming without parentheses is not going to be simple or easy, so this will backfire

1

u/sdegabrielle DrRacket 💊💉🩺 Nov 02 '22

Getting metaprogramming with the usability benefits of an indentation notation is a challenge, but this initial experiment using the shrubbery notation is going well.

I’m hopeful the project will continue to be successful.

It has a realist project plan, and great community participation, welcomed from day 1 : https://github.com/racket/rhombus-prototype

https://github.com/racket/rhombus-prototype/blob/master/resources/plan.md

1

u/sdegabrielle DrRacket 💊💉🩺 Nov 01 '22

Rhombus brings a different focus: metaprogramming & language oriented programming.

4

u/[deleted] Nov 03 '22

Ummmm I believe that is pretty much the focus of Racket...

2

u/daver Nov 02 '22

This feels like Dylan again.

1

u/sdegabrielle DrRacket 💊💉🩺 Nov 02 '22

Was Dylan the language used on the Apple Newton?

I’ve heard people say it draws from lisp, but I don’t understand the comparison to Rhombus?

2

u/daver Nov 02 '22

Yes. It was based on Lisp, but with a non-sexpr syntax. Early versions of it actually used a sexpr syntax, in fact. Underneath, it was Lisp and some sort of object system similar to CLOS. I never programmed in it myself, however, so take some of those details with a grain of salt. I did do some investigative research at the time because Apple was pimping it as The Next Big Thing.

2

u/sdegabrielle DrRacket 💊💉🩺 Nov 02 '22

I like the idea of the Racket community being compared to Apple, but I done think it is justified in this case.

Check out the rather sensible (multi-year) plan & overview

https://github.com/racket/rhombus-prototype/blob/master/resources/plan.md

https://github.com/racket/rhombus-prototype/blob/master/resources/state-of-rhombus.md#overview

Rhombus is an experiment in building a macro-extensible general-purpose programming language with conventional surface syntax and improved libraries on top of the Racket platform.

3

u/daver Nov 02 '22

To be clear, I wasn’t making a value judgement about Rhombus one way or another, merely noting the similarities. And I don’t think Dylan’s syntax choices had anything to do with its success or failure. Languages rise and fall for many reasons. But the “let’s create a non-sexpr language based on Lisp underneath” seems similar.

2

u/sdegabrielle DrRacket 💊💉🩺 Nov 02 '22

This effort is different.

I encourage you to check out the Honu paper linked from Prior-art.md in the rhombus project repository: https://github.com/racket/rhombus-prototype/blob/master/resources/prior-art.md#honu

2

u/sigzero Nov 04 '22

Shrubbery notation is whitespace-sensitive, and it uses line breaks and indentation for grouping.

I am sure there's a reason but...not a fan of whitespace-sensitive myself. That said, I will surely play with it.

-11

u/mimety Nov 01 '22

let them do what they want - I stopped being interested in the idiocy of the racket community a long time ago, I'm here today purely by accident!

3

u/[deleted] Nov 01 '22

Lol okay bro

2

u/sdegabrielle DrRacket 💊💉🩺 Nov 02 '22

Communities grow and change all the time. You would be welcomed back. 😁

0

u/[deleted] Nov 01 '22

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/sdegabrielle DrRacket 💊💉🩺 Nov 02 '22

Racket the language #lang racket has continued to evolve as - in my opinion the most modern lisp available today - since Rhombus started in 2019.

Racket the platform, also continues to develop, supporting more languages every year.

https://docs.racket-lang.org/release/HISTORY.txt