mstenber at cc.Helsinki.FI
Thu Nov 25 11:17:58 CET 1999
Gareth McCaughan <Gareth.McCaughan at pobox.com> writes:
> Dylan is sort of nice. I can't think of any purpose for which
> I'd prefer Dylan to Common Lisp, though; the strengths of the
> two languages are in similar places, and I think CL wins.
I have always found lisp-ish syntax of "masses of ()s" disconcerting in
large amounts - admittedly, I've written more than few lines of
[ce]lisp/scheme/.., but never enjoyed browsing the results very much. I
consider Dylan to be "readable" clisp.
Admittedly, if the notation of clisp doesn't hinder you, it's _very_
powerful tool - I just can't wrap my head around larger clisp constructs..
>From trivial example - do you consider (+ 2 (* 3 4)) more readable than 2 +
3 * 4 most languages (including Dylan) allow me to do?
> Gareth McCaughan Gareth.McCaughan at pobox.com
> sig under construction
"If you want to travel around the world and be invited to speak at
a lot of different places, just write a Unix operating system."
-- Linus Torvalds
More information about the Python-list