merits of Lisp vs Python

Ramon Diaz-Uriarte rdiaz02 at gmail.com
Sat Dec 9 04:45:12 EST 2006


On 08 Dec 2006 19:56:42 -0800, Paul Rubin
<"http://phr.cx"@nospam.invalid> wrote:

(...)

> Lisp just seems hopelessly old-fashioned to me these days.  A
> modernized version would be cool, but I think the more serious
> Lisp-like language designers have moved on to newer ideas.

Paul, I find most of your comments well thought. But I don't follow
these. Could you elaborate?

a) "old-fashioned"? Is that supposed to be an argument? I guess
addition and multiplication are old-fashioned, and so is calculus;so?
I think "old-fashioned" should only carry a negative connotation in
the fashion world, not in programming.


b) "the more serious Lisp-like language designers have moved on to
newer ideas." Can you elaborate? I am not an expert but by looking at,
say, lambda the ultimate, I'd say this statement is just not true. And
which are these "newer ideas"; what programming languages are
incorporating them? (Scala, Mozart/Oz, Alice-ML, ...).


R.


> --
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>


-- 
Ramon Diaz-Uriarte
Statistical Computing Team
Structural Biology and Biocomputing Programme
Spanish National Cancer Centre (CNIO)
http://ligarto.org/rdiaz



More information about the Python-list mailing list