Python syntax in Lisp and Scheme

Frode Vatvedt Fjeld frodef at cs.uit.no
Sat Oct 4 08:59:04 EDT 2003


Alex Martelli <aleax at aleax.it> writes:

> Good summary: if you fancy yourself as a language designer, go for
> Lisp; if you prefer to use a language designed by somebody else,
> without you _or any of the dozens of people working with you on the
> same project_ being able to CHANGE the language, go for Python.

I believe it is very unfortunate to view lisp macros as something that
is used to "change the language". Macros allow syntactic abstraction
the same way functions allow functional abstraction, and is almost as
important a part of the programmer's toolchest. While macros _can_ be
used to change the language in the sense of writing your own
general-purpose iteration construct or conditional operator, I believe
this is an abuse of macros, precisely because of the implications this
has for the readability of the code and for the language's user
community.

-- 
Frode Vatvedt Fjeld




More information about the Python-list mailing list