Python syntax in Lisp and Scheme

[Jon S. Anthony]

"Andrew Dalke" <adalke at mindspring.com> writes:

> > I don't know how this could be done with 1st, rst or hd, tl respectively.
> 
> Okay, I gave alternatives of "." and ">" instead of "car" and "cdr"
> "." for "here" and ">" for "the rest; over there".  These are equally
> composable.
> 
> . == car
> > == cdr
> cadr  == >.
> caddr == >>.
> cddr == >>

These "look" worse than the version you're railing against and are
bombs waiting to go off since they have long standing prior meanins
not in any way associated with this type of operation.  OTOH, if you
really wanted them, you could define them.


> Python's reply "There should be one-- and preferably only one --
> obvious way to do it."

This then is probably the best reason to _not_ use Python for anything
other than the trivial.  It has long been known in problem solving
(not just computation) that multiple ways of attacking a problem, and
shifting among those ways, tends to yield the the better solutions.


> > The learning curve is steeper, but in the long run you become much more
> > productive.
> 
> Which brings us back to the start of this thread.  :)

If your problems are trivial, I suppose the presumed lower startup
costs of Python may mark it as a good solution medium.

/Jon