On Sat, 09 Dec 2006 22:04:04 +0100, mystilleef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bill Atkins wrote: >> Are any of these not subjective? > > Objectivity is in the eye of the beholder. > >> Lisp is much more than a functional language. > > Maybe so. But I've only ever appreciated its functional aspects. I > wouldn't choose Lisp or its derivatives for OO related tasks even if > I'm high. > You are just being silly. Lisp's OO environment CLOS is vastly superior to Python classes. Both in terms of expressive power and flexibility. You might even find out if you ever learnt how to use it. Lisp also supports procedural programming just fine. In the windows world the best way to access system libraries are via .NET. Thus each language inventing it's own libraries is quickly becoming a thing of the past. Also you can mix and match languages according to need. Python is fine if you approach programming as Lego, simply gluing together libraries. But if you want to do some serious algorithmic's you may find that it is just to slow. -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
