As a retired electrician attempting hobby-level "learn to code" (i.e. I don't know anything about modern programming and did not even understand anything from OP's link), this Amazon review helped me understand OP's link:
>..I’ve been (slowly) working my way through The Little Typer. It’s a deep dive on dependent types, starting with the very basics and building up a toy language one step at a time. I can feel it gradually changing how I think about programming (heck, how I think about thinking).
>..It’s really, really enjoyable. The format is very approachable, even fun. Rigorous and demanding, yet doesn’t take itself too seriously. Some lisp experience is helpful, but probably (maybe?) not necessary. But do yourself a favor and learn lisp anyway ;-)
Maybe some day I'll motivate myself to even figure out how to first install Racket/Pie (first, I have to figure out what even these are).
Thanks for the motivation/educational resource, OP.
The Little Schemer and The Seasoned Schemer are both beginner books using Scheme. The Reasoned Schemer uses Scheme + Minikanren, an extension of Scheme that allows for logical/relational programming (look up Prolog and Datalog as languages in the same vein). The Little Typer is the linked book covering type systems and, specifically, dependent typing. The Little Learner covers machine learning. The Little Prover uses the same format and has you develop proofs.
Little, Seasoned, and Reasoned are, IMO, the better books in the series to start with. I found the later ones to be good but very dense and not always as clear, had to step back a lot more and reread sections. That's mostly due to the material being much harder and more technical than the earlier books, not a quality issue with the writing itself.
My recommend reading order for someone with no Racket, Scheme, or Lisp experience wanting to tackle the series would be: Little -> Seasoned -> [Optional: Reasoned] -> {Any order: Prover, Typer, Learner}. I think Prover may be better before Typer, but it's been a while since I looked at either, so a soft recommendation of Prover -> Typer.
If you have some Racket, Scheme, or Lisp experience, I'd suggest to either skim the first couple books to get used to the format or skip them entirely and use Reasoned as your first book in the series.
With no Scheme or programming background, I'd study HtDP (https://htdp.org) as an interlude, after The Little Schemer. Pace is gentle, and explanations about program design are long and very lucid. After those two, I'd try The Little MLer. The other books are quite advanced, better to build solid foundations first.
The Little Schemer is one of my top two favorite programming books. But it's not something I'd recommend as a way to learn how to do the programmer job. It's fun and useful in the way that dropping acid is fun and useful, at least from what I've been told as a teetotaler who's never tried anything stronger than Tylenol. When I read that book, it has a long-lasting aftereffect on how I approach problem solving and maybe the world in general.
I have non-data-driven (but informed) opinions on how to pick up coding as a new skill. I think it helps to find a hobby space you're interested in that will motivate you to push through when you get stuck on something. There are some great platforms for live-tinkering with electronics, CircuitPython for example. Or web stuff, if there's a way to get into it in 2024 without being overwhelmed by frameworks and complexity.
Friedman's books are all great. All of them. But they don't work for everybody.
If you can be relaxed and think of the interaction as play, they're very good. If you're feeling more of a "serious business" mindset, it can be hard to get in the groove of his style.
There are a lot of jokes about food and encouragement to take breaks. If you can get into the learning as play mindset, I'd strongly encourage taking the recommended breaks. maybe grab a snack, but spend some time noodling around with the ideas in each section. I think that's the real point, food is a good excuse to pause and get your hands off the keyboard.
Racket should be easy to install. Big download button for a ton of platforms here - https://racket-lang.org
I believe HN still runs on the racket runtime. it may appear to be a toy, but thoughtful design can take you a long long way. it's well supported and a great way to get started.
The other classic is the wizard book - https://sarabander.github.io/sicp/html/index.xhtml the structure and interpretation of computer programs. This'll walk you up to and somewhat through compilation.
There are a ton of programming languages all with amazing assortments of features.
Scheme is much more "there's nothing left to take away". I think it's very much the undisputed champion in that regard. While still being able to ship software. Scheme may not be the optimal choice for all people in all situations (obviously). It's a spectacular place to start though. It may not turn out to be the language for you. That's totally fine! But it'll get you deep enough to figure out what you like and don't like. And, when it comes down to it, you can shape it into pretty much anything.
So, what's the recommended Scheme implementation to "get things done", and not only for learning CS stuffs?
For example, now our backend system is mostly implemented in Go (some with Fiber, some with Echo). The rest are pretty common: Postgres, Mongo, Firebase etc.
Perhaps Gambit? BTW, I have nothing against experimentation. Not everything have to do with practical purpose on mind. That's why I'm also tinkering with Haskell & Ocaml :D
Racket, Guile, Gambit, Chicken Scheme, chez are all pretty solid with different trade-offs. I think Racket has a fairly decent developer experience and others like chez and gambit are great implementations but may be lacking in tooling (in the sense that you won’t get a nice package manager or build tool). Options exist (like Akku) but IMO the scheme ecosystem is somewhat disjointed.
Guile integrates well with C, and uses the same build tools as a lot of the GNU ecosystem (make and autotools).
I recognize the answer isn’t maybe the most helpful but it does exemplify, in my opinion, one of the challenges with using Scheme for getting things done.
If I had to put scheme in production, I think I'd pick racket. I think that would give me the best chance at helping other dev's get set up, explain the problem, and show the solution. anta40 asked about packages, and racket has the db interaction as part of the normal distribution, I see there's a mongo client in the package manager, but no idea about firebase. I guess wrap the cli?
Racket has been ported over to the chez backend, and got a big performance pop. And they've done stuff with arrays instead of lists, immutable lists. Pointer chasing is always going to have certain tradeoffs.
As much as I love scheme, it's going to be a fringe language. Small shop, that can be ok. You need to hire 50 people? yeah, that's not really going to work out I think.
anta40 also mentiond stuff like Haskell and Ocaml. I feel like those are much easier to refactor, the compiler helps so much, you just chase errors and feel good about code staying correct. scheme, I feel like I just throw it away and start over.
For personal stuff, language doesn't matter, think harder, you'll find a way out.
For "team" stuff. Ugh. That really depends on how dysfunctional the team is. I think go is a pretty solid default. But everything is very textured and nuanced. Just you? go with what you know. Wasting time ramping up on a shiny new thing won't ship. You have a mostly working team? Keep doing that. add linters or whatever to improve code quality.
Screwing around with a weekend project that might turn into something big? Racket seems like the path of least resistance. it's a hard question to answer optimally.
I see... so Racket is the most likely choice for work.
Obviously won't use it for my office though, considering Scheme devs here are practically... zero.
Or probably I'll just use Scheme for learning compiler dev :) :D
IMHO, it's a lot easier to write compilers in Haskell or ocaml, for a bunch of reasons.
you might take a look at https://wespiser.com/writings/wyas/00_overview.html
which walks through writing a scheme implementation in Haskell.
Do what's fun. I think both of those are worth poking at.
Maybe Gauche (https://practical-scheme.net/gauche/)? It kinda depends on what you want to get done, though. If the thing you want to get done is to make an operating system I guess Loko would be your go-to.
EDIT: There's also GNU Kawa, which runs on the JVM, so you get all of that Java-y goodness in a language that's actually nice to use.
> Maybe some day I'll motivate myself to even figure out how to first install Racket/Pie (first, I have to figure out what even these are).
If you're retired and don't need to do the Webrogrammer grind of employable skills, that's a great time to learn advanced/alternative topics of programming like this.
(But if you instead want a paying second career, you probably want to either focus on Web or phone app development instead of this, or have a personal connection to get a job in some less-common area of software development. The Little Typer probably won't help you with that.)
I suspect that the book will do a good job of explaining its topic, from scratch. Here's how to install the software that the book uses:
I'd say a Lisp and books like little Schemer, etc. are a perfect way to study programming and computer science. Later on you could have a look at SICP (Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs) which also uses Scheme, but is more advanced than Little Schemer. It's one of my all time favourite CS books.
>..I’ve been (slowly) working my way through The Little Typer. It’s a deep dive on dependent types, starting with the very basics and building up a toy language one step at a time. I can feel it gradually changing how I think about programming (heck, how I think about thinking).
>..It’s really, really enjoyable. The format is very approachable, even fun. Rigorous and demanding, yet doesn’t take itself too seriously. Some lisp experience is helpful, but probably (maybe?) not necessary. But do yourself a favor and learn lisp anyway ;-)
Maybe some day I'll motivate myself to even figure out how to first install Racket/Pie (first, I have to figure out what even these are).
Thanks for the motivation/educational resource, OP.