As the other reply said, it is general purpose. It has a focus on education tooling, and language design (languages can be easily implemented on Racket)

▲

hatmatrix 3 hours ago | parent [-]

What are some difference between the education tooling around Racket and that which enables "industrial" applications Common Lisp is known for?

	▲	gus_massa an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I think SBCL has better support for annotations. You can claim that a variable is an int and the compiler will thrust you and generante fast code. You can use Typed Racket to add annotations. The compiler will verify your that your claims are consistent and perhaps add some runtime checks when you read data or use other external sources. It will remove most of the internal checks, but not all of them. (Probably some features of Racket like impersonators make generating fast code faster, but on the other hand allows Typed Racket and other variants/libraries to ensure external objects behave correctly.) Disclaimer: I use "Plain" Racket, so both descriptions may be slightly wrong.
	▲	spdegabrielle 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		That's a good question. The education tooling is all optional (so their only impact is perceptual) DrRacket, teaching languages, and supporting libraries are all optional. (see Minimal Racket - just the compiler and package manager https://download.racket-lang.org/releases/9.0/#:~:text=SHA25... ) I'd like to know what tooling is missing from Racket that is available in major general purpose languages like C#, Java, or Common Lisp implementations?