merits of Lisp vs Python

[André Thieme]

Aahz schrieb:
> 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.

If you ask a non-programmer to read programs he/she will have difficulties.
But I guess this person would not have more problems learning than any
other programming language. They are not biased because they don't know
how programs look like. If you show Lisp code to people who know C or
Java, Python or PHP they will not find as easily the structure.
They are already used to something, and we all are creatures of habit.



> As for your claims about speed, they are also nonsense; I doubt one
> would find an order of magnitude increase of speed for production
> programs created by a competent Lisp programmer compared to programs
> created by a competent Python programmer.

The Python language interpreter itself is programmed in C (biggest parts).
Lisp compilers are programmed in Lisp.
Both are mature production programs. Why do you think isn't the Python
interpreter programmed in pure Python?



> 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.

When Lisp got so many millions it was not known how to create very good
compilers. Mankind had to learn it, so these investments were needed.
Today there are open source Lisps. And while they don't get millions
of Dollars for development they can produce mature production code.


André
--