Re: Choosing a new language

[Achim Schneider]

Rico Secada <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> Second, I need some advice.
> 
http://www.nondot.org/sabre/Mirrored/AdvProgLangDesign/

Learn, or better said understand, those and then choose wisely.

Lisp throws lambda calculus right into your face, which is a good
thing. Scheme might be the better choice, it's lexically scoped:
http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/
There are also video lectures with people with funny hats speaking wise
words.

For lisp, (and also a good read if you go for scheme, same with the
wizard book above the different way round), the book of choice is
http://www.paulgraham.com/acl.html

Python is Yet Another Scripting Language, borrowing concepts from more
advanced languages. You might want to go for the real thing instead,
although it's certainly nice.

Haskell is to scheme what a basketball basket is to a trash bin. It's
typed strictly and pure, but with some effort you will also be able to
throw your trash through the basket as well as find a trash bin big
enough for your ball
. 
-- 
(c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers for
past copyright information. All rights reserved. Unauthorised copying,
hiring, renting, public performance and/or broadcasting of this
signature prohibited. 
-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Choosing a new language

[Achim Schneider]

Tim Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Xah Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >Let me tell you, since you know PHP, that PHP and Perl are
> >practically identical in their high-levelness or expressiveness or
> >field of application (and syntax), and, Perl and Python are pretty
> >much the same except their syntax.
> 
> I agree with the fundamental sentiment here, but it's important to
> note that the syntax difference between Perl and Python is an enormous
> consideration.
> 
> The biggest problem with Perl's syntax, in my view, is that it is
> darned near impossible to write Perl code that can be read and
> understood later, by anyone, including the author.  I've used both
> languages extensively, and even with all of that experience, it takes
> considerable effort for me to go back to the Perl scripts I wrote 4
> or 5 years ago and grasp what they actually do.
> 
> With Python, on the other hand, much of the source code reads like
> English prose.  It's certainly possible to code "write-only"
> sequences by abusing comprehensions and generators, but obfuscations
> like that are the exception rather than the rule.

Should I start a flame war? Shouldn't I?

It's New Year's Eve, after all, fits quite nicely.

Perl excels on executing braindumps. Python is quite good in that area,
too.

Haskell, too, but only if you think Haskell. And Haskell has style.
Good style. Very good style, to be exact. 

In the end that means that you can't read your Perl and Python programs
'cos your brain was a bit muddy at the time you wrote it.

Well, with Haskell this would never happen, as you wouldn't have ever
been able to write such atrocious code in the first place.

You would rather think about the problem in detail, get disabused by
old aunty typecheck, abstract, and write completely unintelligent code
_after_ understanding that your brainmuddiness was actually complete
clarity, it was the language you were trying to implement it in that
made it muddy.

And now please all stop posting and let me get completely drunk in
relative peace.

-- 
(c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers for
past copyright information. All rights reserved. Unauthorised copying,
hiring, renting, public performance and/or broadcasting of this
signature prohibited. 
-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list