If you create whole new languages, i.e. external languages, not really embedded DSLs, with their own syntax, how is Racket better than other languages at implementing those?
Neither the sntax object, nor hygiene are of concern when you build external DSLs, which the author's examples seem to be.
I have not yet seen a compelling argument for Racket there vs. for instance a parser generator framework.
I might just be missing the point. Either way the author's convincing seemed to have failed
for me.
Neither the sntax object, nor hygiene are of concern when you build external DSLs, which the author's examples seem to be.
I have not yet seen a compelling argument for Racket there vs. for instance a parser generator framework.
I might just be missing the point. Either way the author's convincing seemed to have failed for me.