Benefits of moving from Python to Common Lisp?

Andrew Dalke dalke at dalkescientific.com
Tue Nov 13 20:10:10 CET 2001


Marco Antoniotti:
>Historical cruft?  The evolution of the languages have been different.
>The presence of strong vendors in the CL camp does (IMHO) work as a
>disincentive to community wide standardization.

Interesting.  So by *not* having a strong advocacy for Python,
there isn't the urge to have multiple competing implementations,
so Python can keep developing new 'standard' libraries?

I like that approach -- less arguments and more code  :)

[Seeing that you didn't cross-post to c.l.lisp ..]

I always seemed to me too easy to make new Lisps, and many of the
people doing Lisp argue for esthetic purity, which leads to the
large number of variations in the language.  Python has always
felt more pragmatic, and pragmatically speaking it's easier to have
one standard, reference platform from which other implementations
derive, rather than through a language spec.

>As for  "widely used though non-standard libraries for CL for "doing
>stuff like internet programming", you can check the CLOCC
>(http://sourceforge.net/projects/clocc). Not much, but it is there.

I know little about CL systems, which is why I quoted the original
statement from someone else.

                    Andrew
                    dalke at dalkescientific.com






More information about the Python-list mailing list