merits of Lisp vs Python

[Ken Tilton]

Aahz wrote:
> In article <1165598576.650860.126740 at 16g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>,
> Mark Tarver <dr.mtarver at ukonline.co.uk> wrote:
> 
>>I'm looking at Python and I see that the syntax would appeal to a
>>newbie.  Its clearer than ML which is a mess syntactically.  But I
>>don't see where the action is in Python.   Not yet anyway.  Lisp syntax
>>is easy to learn.  And giving up an order of magnitude is a high price
>>to pay for using it over Lisp.
> 
> 
> Speaking as someone who had been programming for more than twenty years
> before learning Python (including a brief gander at Lisp), and also
> referring to many years of observations of newcomers to Python: Python's
> syntax also appeals to experienced programmers.
> 
> I would say that your statement about Lisp syntax is wrong.  Not that it
> is technically inaccurate, but that it completely misses the point, so
> much so that it is wrong to say it.  One of the key goals of Python is
> readability, and while it is indeed easy to learn the rules for Lisp
> syntax, observational experience indicates that many people (perhaps even
> the vast majority of people) find it difficult to learn to read Lisp
> programs.

No programming language is easy to read, and no Lisp programmer stopped 
using Lisp because they had been using it for a month and just could not 
get used to reading it. So I think you are just making things up. :)

> Consider this: Lisp has had years of development, it has had millions of
> dollars thrown at it by VC firms -- and yet Python is winning over Lisp
> programmers.  Think about it.

Haha, what's the score? And how much time is left in the first quarter?

:)

ken

-- 
Algebra: http://www.tilton-technology.com/LispNycAlgebra1.htm

"Well, I've wrestled with reality for thirty-five
years, Doctor, and I'm happy to state I finally
won out over it." -- Elwood P. Dowd

"I'll say I'm losing my grip, and it feels terrific."
    -- Smiling husband to scowling wife, New Yorker cartoon