merits of Lisp vs Python

[André Thieme]

Markus Triska schrieb:
> Ken Tilton <kentilton at gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> I think all-rules-all-the-time Prolog is the poster boy for paradigm
>> slavery.  (I did try for a famous two months to use Prolog as a
>> general-purpose programming language.)
> 
> Don't expect to learn Prolog properly in so little time. To your
> previous question whether the ~180 lines of Lisp code in some online
> book constitute an "industrial strength" Prolog: only if the following
> ~180 lines of Prolog code implement an "industrial strength" Lisp.

Hallo, you are of course right. There are some prolog implementations
for Lisp that implement some parts of Prolog. To get the full thing one
would of course need a big lot more of work.
The idea is to get the basic constructs of Prolog available for Lisp.
And with 2k LOC there are already some nice things that one can do.
Those who know the paradigm of logical programming can recognize that
a problem falls into this domain and then use inside of Lisp some tools
that allow to express the problem in this domain specific language.

If one really wants/needs Prolog then one should use it ;)
The Prolog implementations are much more efficient and very stable.
But often even 60% of Prolog are so expressive, that it can be a real
productivity booster.


André
--