←back to thread

Practical Scheme

(practical-scheme.net)
153 points ufko_org | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
GuestFAUniverse ◴[] No.45653245[source]
Where's the "practical" one that site really reflected?

I liked scheme as a learning tool and got highest grades. That doesn't change my impression that most of the sites covering it are mental masturbation. Puzzles, or programs for the sake of scheme itself. Where's the stuff to solve real world problems? (OK, mostly solved by other languages anyway... Still: where is the content that really wants a junior to try it out for routine problems and the senior tonstay with it?)

replies(5): >>45653768 #>>45653976 #>>45654201 #>>45657871 #>>45658304 #
1. cess11 ◴[] No.45654201[source]
Due to the R-series of standards there are actually quite a lot of libraries you can use.

I'm not sure what you mean by "real world problems" but I think most would consider Cisco router firmware to be in that domain. In some sense, due to Cisco the Internet runs on two Lisp-like programming languages: Erlang and Chez.

If you look at TFA you'll find that it links over to a few articles that describe inventing a Scheme to solve things like high paced computer graphics production and large scale inventories.

replies(2): >>45657462 #>>45658194 #
2. GuestFAUniverse ◴[] No.45657462[source]
That might be. TCL has/had? a niche there too.

What I meant was: where are the resources that teach how to tackle everyday chores? O'Reilly has a lot of "Real world <niche lang.>".

Not finished "practical" software -- albeit it's utterly cool to see that there are working projects in numbers / good showcases.

It's fine to have a collection for scheme (like the endless and sometimes helpful "awesome x" collections).

I'm missing the "Automate the boring stuff" and the like.

Maybe I'm more irritated about the lack of adoption (and grumpy about that -- not really the OP). E.g. I don't get it that Nix has more outreach than Guix, despite even Nix-users sometimes agree that the language isn't a strong selling point (I don't know about the idiosyncrasies of Guile, seemed preferable at first glance).

3. andrewflnr ◴[] No.45658194[source]
Erlang is really not lisp-like beyond being functional. It's not especially homoiconic, much stricter about mutation than most lisps, and overall has a different focus. IIRC it started as a Prolog dialect, and I think it's still closer to that legacy than anything particularly lispy.
replies(1): >>45665098 #
4. cess11 ◴[] No.45665098[source]
I invite people to try it out and then get back to us and tell us who is more right.
replies(1): >>45665302 #
5. andrewflnr ◴[] No.45665302{3}[source]
I have written both Erlang and Scheme (and even more Elixir). Have you? They're quite distinct.

I'm genuinely confused why you would be convinced about this. What are the points of similarity that aren't common to all functional languages?