Python syntax in Lisp and Scheme
Eli Barzilay
eli at barzilay.org
Tue Oct 7 18:16:38 EDT 2003
james anderson <james.anderson at setf.de> writes:
> Eli Barzilay wrote:
> >
> > (This hits one of the major differences between Lisp and Scheme --
> > in Lisp I'm not as happy to use HOFs because of the different
> > syntax
>
> which difference differnt syntax?
Huh?
> > (which is an indication of a different mindset, which leads to
> > performance being optimized for a certain style). Scheme is much more
> > functional in this respect, for example -- using HOF versions of
> > with-... compared to Lisp where these are always macros.)
>
> in practice, as a rule, a with- is available at least optionally also as a
> call-with-. not just for convenience, but also for maintainability.
> [...]
Yes, but I was talking about the difference approaches, for example:
(dolist (x foo)
(bar x))
vs:
(mapc #'bar foo)
> i am curious, however, about the HOF equivalents for macros which
> expand primarily to changes to the lexical environment. [...]
That was the point I made in the beginning.
--
((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://www.barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!
More information about the Python-list
mailing list