From whence Lisp envy?

[Aaron K. Johnson]

In message <87u1hdv5ti.fsf at key.localdomain>, Patrick W wrote:
> Aaron K. Johnson <akjmicro at yahoo.com> writes:
> 
> >  Are all these kowtows to Lisp justified?
> 
> If you interpret a few nods in Lisp's direction as "kowtows", it
> suggests a pretty childish outlook on your part. 

Oh yeah? Well pooh on you! I'm not afraid of you, you poopy-butt!

> (If you must see it
> in adversarial terms, why not see it as a bit of friendly rivalry
> between the two best players in the field?  These 'rivals', if they
> must be rivals, have quite a lot to teach each other).

No. Lisp must be killed! Lisp must be killed!!!! Lisp must DIE!
 
> > (If you ask me, looking at Python's syntax and Libraries should make
> > Lispers kowtow to Python).
> 
> If pretty syntax and convenient libraries are your most important
> criteria (which is I don't mean to criticise, BTW), then it's natural
> that you'd see it this way.  Others don't have the same priorities.

Yeah, they want ugly syntax and lame libraries--but be able to prove
mathematical soundness....

> Lisp is, in many ways, a more powerful language than Python, 

because of?...... don't tell me....macros, right? 

> but
> Python is often more convenient.  It's possible to be happy with both,
> and grow out of the stupid psychological need for one to somehow
> "triumph" over the other, which many of us apparently have
> w.r.t. programming languages.

No. Python must kick Lisp's ass and there must be real bloodshed or I'm not
happy. We should send all people who disagree with me to labor camps, where
they will be forced to edit lisp code without emacs parenthesis matching for 22
hours a day , and hold CLTL over their heads, and if they lower it, they get
whipped by a leather belt, and they drink their own urine. (lol)
 
> > Anyway, it seems to me that more things can be done quite easily in
> > Python where they take some hoop jumping in Lisp.
> 
> Undoubtedly true.

I'm glad you agree--you were going to be first to be shipped off to the Lispers
labor camp.
 
> > And the arguments that python doesn't scale up to larger systems as
> > well as Lisp are unfounded and theoretical (two qualities it seems
> > many die-hard Lispers value in their arguments)
> 
> But this is just cheerleading.  Who's arguing that Python doesn't
> scale up?  Which arguments about Lisp's scalability are "unfounded and
> theoretical"?  Get real, man, or put on a skirt and wave your
> streamers without pretence.

You can't see it, but I am holding Python pompoms every time I write in
c.l.python! 
 
> > I would bet any day that two programmers of equal skill in Lisp and
> > Python respectively dueling it out would end in Python winning the
> > day for its rapid prototyping stregths.
> 
> Rah rah rah! Go Python Go! ;-)


Definately! Kick Ass, dude!!! (holding fingers in heavy metal fashion)

-Aaron.