Python from Wise Guy's Viewpoint

[Espen Vestre]

Joachim Durchholz <joachim.durchholz at web.de> writes:

> Maybe. I'm pretty sure it wasn't Xerox, but something else.

Perhaps a "Siemens lisp machine"? (which was a Xerox with a Siemens
sticket on it :-))

> > Yes they do. E.g. :around-methods wrap _around_ the primary method. 
> > If you want the most specific method to be called first, you can 
> > always use ordinary ancestor methods (call-next-method).
> 
> No, I just want to use the implementation that happens to be useful for
> my subclass.

What a funny comment, I don't think you understand how this works.
Try to do some CLOS programming, maybe you'll like it!

> I don't pretend I'm happy with that. I just mean that I can understand
> the PHB reasoning at work, and I don't know any good alternatives.
> Welcome to real life - TANSTAAFL.

Who said anything about a free lunch? And why do you think you need
to welcome me to real life? I know quite a deal about badly organized
companies and how the Dilbert principle works in real life.

> Though that's already too long for a commercial project. Job
> satisfaction is an important factor, and forcing developers to adopt to
> many parentheses is just a needless irritation (from a boss's
> perspective, Lispers will do fine with them of course).

I have seen programmers adopt very quickly to lisp syntax, I don't
know why you had a problem with it. Maybe you had bad instructors
or a bad programming environment.

> > Yet another point: Inside every substantially advanced program, 
> > there's a lisp trying to get out.
> 
> I agree with that, though one could replace "Lisp" with other language
> names.

No, you can't.
-- 
  (espen)