Python syntax in Lisp and Scheme

[Alexander Schmolck]

Joe Marshall <jrm at ccs.neu.edu> writes:

> Alexander Schmolck <a.schmolck at gmx.net> writes:
> 
> 
> > Additionally most of the time the code is actively being edited and thus *not*
> > in a consistent state -- this is how most editing errors occur and I don't
> > think lisp compares favourably to python here.
> 
> EXACTLY!  The issue is that the inconsistent state in lisp is rarely
> a legal expression, but an inconsistent state in Python often is.

In case you misinterpreted the above: I meant in *both* python and lisp. The
likelihood of inconsistency in terms of a legal expression that doesn't do
what the superficial observer might think (which wasn't what I meant above) is
certainly considerably greater in lisp than in python (simply because python's
syntax places far more constraints on what a certain parse-tree can look like
as actual code).

I've also tried my best to show that for the examples you presented there is
no need to take an intermediate editing step in pyhthon that involves a
semantically valid but unintended state which could plausibly figure as a
source of errors.

'as