When comparing Racket vs MIT/GNU, the Slant community recommends Racket for most people. In the question“What are the best Lisp dialects?” Racket is ranked 2nd while MIT/GNU is ranked 8th. The most important reason people chose Racket is:
Includes several free online books and great documentation.
Specs
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Free Resources to Learn
Includes several free online books and great documentation.
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 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 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 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.
Cons
Con Not very well-documented
The documentation is very sparse.
Con Ill-designed interpreter's interface
The interpreter does not support the use of the left and right arrows to move the cursor in the code and the use of the up and down arrows to navigate through the history.
Con Not made to run as standalone
Cannot be compiled to a standalone executable, only to byte code that can be run from the interpreter; and cannot be conveniently interpreted by the interpreter from the command line.
