quick racket editor survey

[Stephen De Gabrielle]

Hi, 

quick racket editor survey: https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/H23ZTDW

I'm not part of the racket team but I am working on a community survey. I'm hoping the results of this will inform part of that.

No personal data collected, but SurveyMonkey logs IP addresses.

Only one multi-answer question, the same question was asked on racket.slack s

how do you edit Racket code?

• DrRacket
• Emacs Racket Mode
• Visual Studio Code
• Vim
• text editor (notepad++, sublime text)
• Visual Studio/Xcode/InteliJ/Eclipse
• Other ?

[Stephen De Gabrielle]

If anyone is interested you can view the responses here: https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-GBD6J7ST7/

s.

[Stephen De Gabrielle]

at 18 responses 

I think this is fascinating. 

(I'm filled with fear and admiration for the lone racketeer in the middle)

S.

[Stephen De Gabrielle]

At 62 response, sadly the histogram doesn't show how many people use two or even three editors.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-GBD6J7ST7/

s.

[James Platt]

On Feb 26, 2020, at 10:44 AM, Stephen De Gabrielle wrote:

> At 62 response, sadly the histogram doesn't show how many people use two or even three editors.
> https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-GBD6J7ST7/

I am in transition between DrRacket and Emacs so I checked both of those two, myself. That was after you had posted your Venn diagram. I was mostly using DrRacket before but now I am mostly using Emacs. I still like the features in DrRacket for tracing definitions and use it for that. Also, I have two monitors and Gnu Emacs in the terminal does fine for splitting the screen on one monitor but not so well across two monitors. So, on the occasions where I want another file open on my second monitor, I have been using Emacs on the main monitor but DrRacket on the second. I probably could use Emacs on multiple monitors if I used one of the Mac specific GUI versions. I noticed several people at Racketcon using, not Aquamacs, but another GUI version of Emacs. Is there any particular reason to pick one of these over another?

I also have set up a Racket development environment in Termux on my Android tablet. Since there is no version of DrRacket for Android, I am exclusively using Emacs there. Having said that, I haven't actually done any more yet than test it to see that it works.


James

[Stephen De Gabrielle]

Hi james

 I noticed several people at Racketcon using, not Aquamacs, but another GUI version of Emacs.  Is there any particular reason to pick one of these over another?

Maybe spacemacs? (I don’t use spacEmacs so I’m only guessing based on the survey response)

S.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/46BF6E5F-A613-4FF5-9C9B-C1526B31B54A%40biomantica.com.

--

----

[Hendrik Boom]

On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 12:01:27PM +0100, Stephen De Gabrielle wrote:
> Hi james
>
> * I noticed several people at Racketcon using, not Aquamacs, but another

> GUI version of Emacs. Is there any particular reason to pick one of these

> over another?*

>
> Maybe spacemacs? (I don’t use spacEmacs so I’m only guessing based on the
> survey response)

No idea. I haven't even heard of those.

I use emacs for everything except Racket.

In my life, I've used emacs, zemacs, and microemacs.

Of these three, microemaacs was the only independent implementation,
based on an language that wasn't a Lisp derivative. (I think a
byte-coded or threaded-coded stack language, but that was a long
time ago.

-- hendrik

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/CAGHj7-J35yMXr7jWi-1ifQ5tDh0r6ibfv6UUUMZtZrR%2Bugf3Jw%40mail.gmail.com.

[John Cowan]

MicroEmacs was based on MINT ("MINT Is Not Trac").  TRAC is a language based entirely on macroprocessing, with an implementation written in Perl at <http://www.catb.org/retro/trac.shar.gz>.  But there were a lot of other differences unrelated to Elisp vs. MINT.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/20200229175601.6tm6chr4c5o2tclh%40topoi.pooq.com.

[Hendrik Boom]

On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 07:24:19PM -0500, John Cowan wrote:
> MicroEmacs was based on MINT ("MINT Is Not Trac"). TRAC is a language
> based entirely on macroprocessing, with an implementation written in Perl
> at <http://www.catb.org/retro/trac.shar.gz>. But there were a lot of other
> differences unrelated to Elisp vs. MINT.

Sounds like there was more than one microEmacs. Interesting.

-- hendrik

> > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/20200229175601.6tm6chr4c5o2tclh%40topoi.pooq.com
> > .
> >

[John Cowan]

On Sat, Feb 29, 2020 at 11:33 PM Hendrik Boom <hen...@topoi.pooq.com> wrote:

Sounds like there was more than one microEmacs.  Interesting.

Sorry, I was actually talking about Freemacs, but I had forgotten its name.

John Cowan          http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan        co...@ccil.org
We do, doodley do, doodley do, doodley do,
What we must, muddily must, muddily must, muddily must;
Muddily do, muddily do, muddily do, muddily do,

Until we bust, bodily bust, bodily bust, bodily bust.  --Bokonon