In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mark Tarver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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. 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. 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. -- Aahz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ Member of the Groucho Marx Fan Club -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
