Why is Python popular, while Lisp and Scheme aren't?

[Carl Banks]

Jacek Generowicz wrote:
> Carl Banks <imbosol at vt.edu> writes:
> 
>> As cool as Lisp is, it is too low-level,
> 
> This must be some usage of the term "low-level" with which I was not
> previously familiar.

I mean close to the compiler.


>> The real problem is that, while Python makes a significant effort to
>> accomodate human thinking (i.e., Python lets programmers think like
>> humans instead of machines a lot of the time), Lisp doesn't put a high
>> priority on this.
> 
> Funny, I find that Lisp offers me great help in concentrating on what
> I want to do, rather than the details of how I am going to make the
> machine do it.

Of course it does, but that is not exactly what I was saying.  I'm
very familiar with how Lisp allows you to write embedded languages
that let you approach human thinking as close as you want.

But to write macro, you have to think at a level closer to the
machine.  You have to think about expressions as objects.  That is
thinking like a machine (like software, not like hardware) as opposed
to thinking like a human.

You can say, "I won't use the advanced stuff that requires me to think
like a machine," but then Lisp is pointless, because then it's nothing
but a hard to read, complicated, and faster Python.


>> Python uses infix notation for math.  Most humans were brought up to
>> understand infix.
> 
> So download an infix notation macro ...

As if anyone really does this.  (Shut up, I know they do.)


>> Python is more like C than Lisp at all levels.
> 
> ?
> [snip]

You misunderstood (because I stated it ambiguously):

Python is more like C than Lisp is like C at all levels.  I hope you
won't try to argue that point by point.  ("They both are native
compilers," ok that's one thing.)


>> There are many, many factors that determine the poularity of a
>> langauge.  In this case, I think the main factor is that Python just
>> thinks more like we do than Lisp.
> 
> I would say that the biggst ones (in no particular order) are
> 
> - Python is simpler than Lisp. Entry is easier.

Well, see, I think that's because it's closer to human thinking.  I'm
a step ahead of you.


> - Most people _know_ that Lisp is a slow, arcane language with the
>  list as the only data type (and other such lies). Such lies get
>  repeated, and as a consequence most people don't bother to give Lisp
>  a single look. Python does not suffer from this.

Well, people say Python is slow, and that isn't a lie.  :-)  I'm sure
the lies have something to do with it.  


> - Batteries included: Python's library of packages is larger and more
>  rapidly growing.

I definitely agree this is a very big factor.


-- 
CARL BANKS