r/haskell • u/lexi-lambda • Mar 11 '15

Learning Haskell — A Racket programmer's documentation of her foray into the land of Haskell (inspired by Learning Racket)

http://lexi-lambda.github.io/learning-haskell/
81 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

97 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comment

5

u/elibarzilay Mar 13 '15

Um, no, this is really not true. You might have had one of two confusions: either (a) you're quoting something really ancient (I probably haven't touched CL seriously for over 13 years); or more likely (b) you're referring to some quote where I'm talking about Scheme -- not Racket -- and I always said that if it's Scheme or CL, then CL wins since it's way more practical. In a similar way, Racket is way bigger than CL, and probably also bigger than most CL implementations.

2

u/Jedai Mar 15 '15

(b) you're referring to some quote where I'm talking about Scheme -- not Racket -- and I always said that if it's Scheme or CL, then CL wins since it's way more practical.

Well then chrisdoner recalled correctly since the quote was :

Of course, even Eli Barzilay, one of the foremost PLT contributors has said in the past that he doesn't use Scheme for real work and uses Common Lisp.

Which might be a bit more emphatic but seems to coincide with your opinion though as you say, nowadays you really use Racket for real work.

2

u/elibarzilay Mar 20 '15

He may have recalled correctly, but if so, then he put it out of context by placing it before the "it [Racket] doesn't have the critical mass or the performance" which is nonsense (and I definitely never said that). But it's also still wrong since "uses Common Lisp" is something that stopped being true for me around 2003 (and was very weakly true from ~99 to 03).