if does not evaluate

[Hung Jung Lu]

moughanj at tcd.ie (James Moughan) wrote:
>  I still have to restrain myself from writing PyHaskell now and then.

Maybe it's time to try with some simple prototype.

> Secondly, Lisp's syntax doesn't parse well into the way people think,
> or vica versa.  Python's does; in other words, it's executable
> pseudocode.  Lisp, fundamentally, cannot change in this regard.

But Python does have serious problems when one goes to the next level
of software development. I guess that's why Io and Prothon were born.
Python is at the stage where you need a fresh re-incarnation to go to
the next level.

There are a few directions that need to be explorered, and I am not
sure creating a real new language is the way to go. I've seen it in
Io, where once you set things in stone, it becomes just another Python
with problems that will stay forever. I guess right now it's not the
moment of creating more languages and set things in stone. It's
probably better to have some toy languages or language prototypes to
explorer ideas. Collect enough ideas and experience, and probably
leave the rest to the next generation of people.

Frankly, I see a few camps: (a) Lisp and AOP folks, (b) Functional
folks, (c) Prototype-based folks. Because these are very specialized
fields, very few people seem to be native speakers of all three of
them. The next killer language will have to incorporate lessons learnt
from all three camps. It's a daunting task. It's best to have some toy
languages... like scaled-down model airplanes, or even just the model
airplane parts, before one actually build the real thing.

regards,

Hung Jung