Python syntax in Lisp and Scheme
marcoxa at cs.nyu.edu
Fri Oct 10 17:33:18 CEST 2003
Rainer Deyke wrote:
> Pascal Costanza wrote:
>>Pick the one Common Lisp implementation that provides the stuff you
>>need. If no Common Lisp implementation provides all the stuff you
>>need, write your own libraries or pick a different language. It's as
>>simple as that.
> Coming from a C/C++ background, I'm surprised by this attitude. Is
> portability of code across different language implementations not a priority
> for LISP programmers?
It is. However, history has run against Lisp in this respect. First of
all, there are more than 1.84 implementations of Lisp (4 commercial
ones) and the vendors do not have much incentive in making something
completely portable. OTOH *there are* cross platforms compatibility
layers for many of the things you need. But the problem facing any
Common Lisp library writer is to decide how much to go in terms of cross
implementation and cross platform portability.
Having said that, lets note however, that the actual footprint of CL is
large enough to allow you to write nice portable programs in a much
easier way than e.g. in Scheme or in pre- (and, to some extent post-)
More information about the Python-list