[IronPython] Pondering Monad/MSH and IronPython
shidan at gmail.com
Mon Jul 25 20:22:07 CEST 2005
It's capable of functional programming, somewhat, but it is highly
discouraged, from what I hear lambda, reduce, map and most other
higher order functions will be deprecated in Python 3.
On 7/25/05, Hank Fay <hank at prosysplus.com> wrote:
> Python is capable of functional programming that would make most APLers
> happy: see David Mertz's articles at
> although Ruby was there earlier with closures, according to Mertz.
> From: users-ironpython.com-bounces at lists.ironpython.com
> [mailto:users-ironpython.com-bounces at lists.ironpython.com]
> On Behalf Of John Lam
> Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 12:21 PM
> To: Discussion of IronPython; Discussion of IronPython
> Subject: RE: [IronPython] Pondering Monad/MSH and IronPython
> On the other hand, it's useful to avoid context switches to get things done.
> For example, we recently tossed NAnt out of our build/deploy environment and
> replaced it with Ruby+Rake. In NAnt, the context switch from "scripting a
> task" to "writing a task" was really severe - you had to pull out your
> compiler to get something done. In Ruby+Rake, we now seemlessly migrate back
> and forth between sending commands to the shell, to writing abstractions to
> do certain things (like config our NLBS cluster) to writing descriptions
> like "this target depends on these three other targets".
> I haven't had a chance to look at the MSH language yet - apparently
> something is keeping my betaplace application from being accepted (or my
> spam filter is eating the reply - not sure :)) but for those who have seen
> it, can python or ruby-isms produce more or less the syntax?
> users-ironpython.com mailing list
> users-ironpython.com at lists.ironpython.com
More information about the Ironpython-users