Carl Banks wrote: > On Jul 19, 10:33 am, fft1976 <fft1...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Jul 19, 9:55 am, Frank Buss <f...@frank-buss.de> wrote: >> >>> E.g. the number system: In many Lisp >>> implementations (/ 2 3) results in the fractional object 2/3. In Python 2.6 >>> "2 / 3" results in "0". Looks like with Python 3.1 they have fixed it, now >>> it returns "0.6666666666", which will result in lots of fun for porting >>> applications written for Python <= 2.6. >> How do you explain that something as inferior as Python beat Lisp in >> the market place despite starting 40 years later. > > There was no reason to crosspost this here--looking at the original > thread on comp.lang.lisp it seems they were doing a surprisingly good > job discussing the issue. > > I'm guessing it's because the fanboy Lispers like Ken Tifton were busy > with a flamewar in another thread (LISP vs PROLOG vs HASKELL). > > > Carl Banks
This is an incredibly important discussion and is much weaker because it does not also include Pascal, BASIC, Ada, Oberon and Forth. In fact, picking a computer language is the most important discussion in Computer Science and eclipses even P=NP? in significance. I sure hope we can keep this thread going for a few months. For guidance, see: http://www.tundraware.com/Technology/How-To-Pick-A-Programming-Language/ -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tim Daneliuk tun...@tundraware.com PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
