Python syntax in Lisp and Scheme

[Andrew Dalke]

james anderson:
> was pep-0261 adopted?

Yes.

> has there been any data collected on how many installations are built in
the
> respective modes. for users in the 4-byte mode, has there been any data on
> storage efficiency? on general string-related algorithm performance?

Given that most people probably kill-threaded this discussion, you
might want to ask again on c.l.py with a new subject name.

> do python programmers really not care about using things like os-native
> international type support? [0]

I really am not the right person to talk to on this.  I can offer my
opinion, for what that's worth.

The link you gave is to an Apple API for internationalization.  If
both they and Python use the same Unicode encoding, then the
Python unicode data can be passed directly to the API.  I know
there are bindings between Python and the Apple framework --
Apple asked that Python 2.3 be ready in time for OS 10.3,
and I saw a demo using Apple's GUI builder to make code usable
by Python.  For that, see the current state of the MacPython project.

It seems to me then that all Python offers is a way to create and
manipulate the unicode string, and so long as the correct translations
are done at the interface level to platform-specific features (as
when Python's unicode strings are used for a unicode aware
filesystem like MS Windows') then all is fine.

> that may be a market issue. vendors supply what their clients pay for.
they
> have an interest in product differentiation. open-source developers
develop
> what they need. they have an interest that their implmentation serves
their
> needs. there is some overlap, but evidently the market does not compel the
> order of consolidation which you envision.

I listed a set of packages (regexps, unicode, XML, HTTP client&server)
which are included in the free version of Python.  There are also
commercial distributions which add extra modules, like the ones from
activestate and scipy, but it seems that the standard free Lisp distribution

comes with fewer useful modules than the standard Python one.

Conjecture: Is it that the commericial versions of Lisp pull away
some of the people who would otherwise help raise the default
functionality of the free version?  I don't think so... but then why?

                    Andrew
                    dalke at dalkescientific.com