[Edu-sig] Python for CS101

[John Zelle]

Arthur wrote:
> John writes -
> 
> 
>>Of course implementing something like a queue which has state 
>>(side-effects) is not pure functional programming, but real LISP 
>>programmers don't worry too much about that.
> 
> 
> John sounds like a real LISP programmer (he's being hiding that from us
> until now ;) - and I am interpreting him to be confirming the point Peter
> Seibel is making in the book I referenced, i.e. that many folks know of LISP
> via Scheme and therefore tend to understand LISP to be more purist
> functional than it is in practice. 
>

OK, OK, I'm somewhat busted. My background in AI has caused me to become 
better in LISP than your average bear, but I would never claim to be a 
"real LISP programmer." The absolute truth of the matter is that I once 
_was_ a real Prolog programmer. If you really want to expand your 
horizons, you can't beat Prolog. It's as close as we've gotten to God's 
own language.

> My impetus in approaching LISP would be to become a better Python programmer
> (presuming that it is awfully late in the game to try to become anything of
> a LISP programmer), and that does have something to do, in my mind, with
> more exposure to functional programming.  But concluded that Scheme sounded
> a bit austere on this account, and taking Seibel at his word, I would be
> hoping to get, through LISP, to functional thinking within a multi-paradigm
> context - which should be easier to translate into Pythonic thinking .
>

I happen to think that LISP and Python are very similar languages. 
Python's syntax is easier to read, and LISP's is better/easier for 
meta-programming. The underlying model is very much the same.

--John

-- 
John M. Zelle, Ph.D.             Wartburg College
Professor of Computer Science    Waverly, IA
john.zelle at wartburg.edu          (319) 352-8360