What does Python fix?

[Pekka Niiranen]

Sure, Python's syntax looks nice, but to use another language to get 
performance
(i.e speed) ? That sucks.

I have a feeling Python might renew peoples interest to various lisps.

After studying Python for 2 years I myself have
recently switched to DrScheme because I have no interest
relearning C to write extensions to Python.

What an eye opener it has been to study scheme...

-pekka-


Courageous wrote:

>>I'm curious to read a bit more about why Tim Peters (and presumably
>>others) think that Lisp-inspired languages (even non-prefix ones) are
>>doomed to eternal obscurity.  Would anyone care to comment and/or give
>>me some pointers to commentary on the subject? 
>>    
>>
>
>Shrug. Lisp trades one form of complexity for another. By reducing
>the solution to a universal grammar, they increase the symbolic load
>on the user, who is awash in a page full of very similar symbols.
>This is intimidating in particular to novices, for whatever reason,
>who are instantly alienated. Without sweeping in novices, you lack
>a grass roots movement, and without a grass roots, a language is dead.
>
>The parts of lisp that really matter to the community have since
>been adopted in part by many other languages. Lisp is dead. Long live
>Lisp.
>
>C//
>
>  
>