Python syntax in Lisp and Scheme

[Mark Brady]

This whole thread is a bad idea. If you like python then use python.
Personally I find Scheme and Common Lisp easier to read but that's
just me, I prefer S-exps and there seems to be a rebirth in the Scheme
and Common Lisp communities at the moment. Ironically this seems to
have been helped by python. I learned python then got interested in
it's functional side and ended up learning Scheme and Common Lisp. A
lot of new Scheme and Common Lisp developers I talk to followed the
same route. Python is a great language and I still use it for some
things.

Paul Rubin's comments are just pure fud. 

Some great scheme implementations with large modern libraries (not yet
a match for python but growing fast):
http://www.plt-scheme.org/
http://www-sop.inria.fr/mimosa/fp/Bigloo/
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gauche
http://sisc.sourceforge.net/
http://www.scheme.com/

Common Lisp has a fantastic wiki site (links to implementations and
loads of libraries) with everything you need to get started at:
http://www.cliki.net/index

Also see:
http://www.lisp.org/alu/home
http://common-lisp.net
http://www.cliki.net/YoungLispers

Many of the latest Scheme and Lisp mailing lists can be browsed from:
http://news.gmane.org/index.php?match=gmane.lisp

Develop in the language that suits you but despite the fud you do have
a choice,
Python, Scheme and Common Lisp are all fine languages with good
libraries and FFI capabilities.

Regards,
Mark.



Paul Rubin <http://phr.cx@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote in message news:<7xvfr6lvh6.fsf at ruckus.brouhaha.com>...
> mike420 at ziplip.com writes:
> > If the answer is yes, would many Python programmers switch to Lisp
> > or Scheme if they were offered identation-based syntax?
> 
> I don't think the syntax is that big a deal.  But programming in lisp
> or scheme has a creaky feeling these days, because the traditional
> runtime libraries in those languages have fallen so far behind the
> times.