Why is Python popular, while Lisp and Scheme aren't?
Martti Halminen
martti.halminen at kolumbus.fi
Sat Nov 9 14:21:28 EST 2002
Richard Dillingham wrote:
> > The only thing that could make me at all comfortable with using Lisp
> > would be if I had an editor that would color-highlight not keywords or
> > strings, as color-highlighting usually goes, but levels of parenthesis
> > indentation. So that this:
> >
> > (a (b (c (d e))))
>
> I wonder why you aren't writing
> (a
> (b
> (c
> (d e)
> )
> )
> )
A lisp programmer would write it like this:
(a
(b
(c
(d e))))
or the original: (a (b (c (d e)))) if using so short names and no
control structures causing special indentation.
> The issue with 'Python being easier to read than Lisp,' IMHO, is mainly that
> Python FORCES you to use indentation, whereas Lisp does not.
>
> Since Lisp does not force you to write readable code, you have to force
> yourself to use indentation.
For a beginner it might be forcing, for the professionals it is a major
tool. Not using the canonical indentation style is a sure sign of a
newbie in comp.lang.lisp.
> But I don't see a bunch of C programmers typing
> if (a) { if (b) { if (c) { asdf; } else { zzzz; }} else { foo; }} else
> {bar;}
> like a Lisp coder might type
> (if (a) (if (b) (if (c) (asdf) (zzzz)) (foo)) (bar))
> (if (a)
> (if (b)
> (if (c)
> (asdf)
> (zzzz)
> )
> (foo)
> )
> (bar)
> )
>
(if (a)
(if (b)
(if (c)
(asdf)
(zzzz))
(foo))
(bar))
Would be the normal way to write this.
--
More information about the Python-list
mailing list