What's better about Ruby than Python?

Andrew Dalke adalke at mindspring.com
Mon Aug 18 21:11:41 EDT 2003


Alexander Schmolck:
> No it isn't. Like every other language I know python sucks in a variety of
> ways (only on the whole, much less so), but I don't claim I know how to
fix
> this with a macro system.

What about the other way around?  Make a macro for Lisp or
Scheme which converts Python into the language then evals
the result?

Given how easy it is to parse Python (there are several Python
parsers for Python) and the number of people who have popped
up with Lisp background, I'm surprised no one has done that
for fun.  After all, there is Python for C, Java, .Net, and for
Python (PyPy) and variations like Pyrex and Vyper.  But
none for Lisp?

(I think I remember mention of one some years ago, .. I think
*I* posted that link to c.l.py, but I don't remember when and
can't find it via Google.)

> But show me how to write something like CL's series package that way (or
> better yet, something similar for transforming array and matrix
manipulations
> from some reader-friendly representation into something efficient).

The Boost code for C++ suggests a different way to do the latter.
(I don't think templates are the same as hygenic macros.)

                    Andrew
                    dalke at dalkescientific.com






More information about the Python-list mailing list