merits of Lisp vs Python

[Ken Tilton]

Ken Tilton wrote:
> 
> 
> Andrew Reilly wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, 14 Dec 2006 03:01:46 -0500, Ken Tilton wrote:
>>
>>
>>> You just aren't used to thinking at a level where one is writing code 
>>> to write code.
>>
>>
>>
>> Firstly, I'm looking into lisp because my current python project is too
>> full of boilerplate :-) and too slow.  Coming from a C and assembler
>> background, I'm *used* to meta-programming, and do it all the time.  I
>> even use python, Matlab and bash to write C, sometimes :-)
>>
>> However, in this particular instance, I'm inclined to wonder why
>> meta-programming is the right answer, rather than just doing all of the
>> interpolation and what-not at run-time, based on a big table of your
>> algebra rules? 
> 
> 
> I am afraid I do not see what alternative you are suggesting. I 
> especially do not see how interpolation is in play.

[Guessing pending your clarification] "Interpolation" does happen at 
runtime. This not about the actually quite rare use of macrology to move 
certain calculations to compile time, this is about getting dozens of 
transformation-specifc rules written to fit into a larger mechanism (by 
having the right arguments and returning the right kinds of results, 
with a minimum of boilerplate and a maximum of resiliency in the face of 
refactoring.

The reason I post macro expansions along with examples of the macro 
being applied is so that one can see what code would have to be written 
if I did not have the defskill macro to "write" them for me. I sugest 
one start there, by comparing before and after.

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