Lisp vs Python
amitp.blogspot.com
Lisp vs Python
1–10 of 98 posts
Re: Lisp vs Python
#2I especially like the author's post script. Fortunately, this appears to be the prevailing attitude at HN.
Re: Lisp vs Python
#3Without reading the article, can this be summed up as "People actually use Python"?
Re: Lisp vs Python
#4I also agree with the author's post script. Both are good languages that while overlapping a bit are probably best for different types of projects. I use Python when I need an existing library like NLTK or simple web apps hosted on AppEngine, Common Lisp for research, some semantic web stuff, and general NLP. I use Gambit-C Scheme mostly to write small natively compiled command line utilities (mostly NLP stuff).
It is all about getting stuff done, not insisting on using a favorite language, framework, or platform. Solving problems is what is fun and rewarding, not getting stuck on particular technologies.
Re: Lisp vs Python
#5Without reading the article, can this be summed up as "People actually use Python"?
No. It's something entirely different, which you would know if you had read, or even just skimmed, it.
Re: Lisp vs Python
#6Related discussion:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1ka0j/lisp_vs_p...
Re: Lisp vs Python
#7>Python on the other hand has no macros
I challenge this. I won't pretend that Python has full macro equivalence, but decorators are damned close.
Re: Lisp vs Python
#8Many of the design choices in Clojure are aimed at resolving precisely these concerns. Quoted lists and literal lists are of course usually written '(f x) in most dialects, and Clojure uses [f x] for function arguments and binding lists.
The only concern that remains is that (f x) could be a function call or a macro invokation. This is entirely by design, and is in fact a core idea of lisp that lets you build your own constructs with the same syntax as the language's native ones.
Re: Lisp vs Python
#9>Python on the other hand has no macros I challenge this. I won't pretend that Python has full macro equivalence, but decorators are damned close.
Can you expand on this. What is something that macros can do that decorators can't? And likewise, what are some common uses of macros that decorators can do?
Re: Lisp vs Python
#10Saying that LISP is for writing code and Python is for reading code is like saying that cars are for travelling uphill and bicycles are for travelling downhill.