When comparing Racket vs Gambit, the Slant community recommends Racket for most people. In the question“What are the best scheme implementations?” Racket is ranked 4th while Gambit is ranked 5th. The most important reason people chose Racket is:
Realm of Racket teaches the big-bang approach for managing world state. It does so by walking the reader through the development of small games. There are few guidebooks that are as useful and entertaining.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Realm of Racket is an excellent entry-level guidebook
Realm of Racket teaches the big-bang approach for managing world state. It does so by walking the reader through the development of small games. There are few guidebooks that are as useful and entertaining.
Pro Racket was designed to teach functional programming from the start
Racket is based on Scheme (LISP Family) and is very similar to Clojure. So there are a ton of (). The reason it is easier to learn is that it is not trying to be "Pure" if there is even such a thing in terms of Functional Programming. The great thing about Racket is it has everything included. You get DrRacket for developing programs. You want to add a picture to your software you can insert pictures. If you want to add libraries just open the package manager. The Syntax is an opinion but it really does feel easier to see what is happening since everything is in brackets)
Racket is a really a Programming Language for making Programming Languages. So there are smaller syntax Racket called Student Racket which makes things easier to pick up.
Pro Free resources to Learn
Includes several free online books and great documentation.
Pro Great RPEL IDEA included Dr. Racket
Pro Active community
Racket has an active community of users/developers that makes it easy to get help when needed.
Pro Syntax fits to functional programming
Although syntax is different from that of mainstream languages, S-expressions are a perfect match to functional programming.
Pro Subtly encourages functional programming
Racket makes it inconvenient to pursue imperative habits while encouraging functional programming by Lisps's syntax. For example, the syntax for defining a function is almost the exact same as defining a variable. In addition, Racket has a strong set of higher-order functions built in to the language.
Pro Easily embeddable
Racket is famously embedded in the game engine underlying Naughty Dog's Uncharted and The Last of Us games, because it proved to be so easy to embed.
Pro Can be easily embedded into an existing C/C++ codebase
Gambit has a built-in compiler that generates C code, which then is passed to your system's compiler which in turn compiles it to native code. This makes it easy to integrate Gambit into existing C/C++ projects.
Pro Actively maintained
The maintainers are continually working on improving the implementation in a variety of areas: multicore, modules, backends for x86, ARM, RISCV, JavaScript, Python, Ruby, PHP, Java, and go in addition to the current mature C backend.
Pro Good performance
Gambit is fast/efficient, you can see benchmarks here.
Pro Very portable
It is very portable as it has no external library dependencies. It will build as long as the platform has a C compiler.
Cons
Con Lack of SRFIs
Gambit natively implements few SRFIs. Additional SRFIs are available through the Black Hole and Snow third-party systems.
Con Documentation is poorly formatted
The Gambit documentation directs you to further resources, depending on what you're looking for. Because things are separated into different places, it can be difficult to find what you need.
Some documentation is only available in HTML or PDF formats that are hard to read/follow.
