Why don't people like lisp?

[Pascal Costanza]

Ville Vainio wrote:
> Pascal Costanza <costanza at web.de> writes:
> 
> 
>>So why is it that Python is continuously evolving as a language? Do
>>you think this is going to stop at some stage?
> 
> 
> Python is not only the language, it's also the implementation (or
> implementations). I don't know whether the evolution is ever going to
> stop, you've got to ask Guido :-). Obviously I wouldn't mind if the
> language reached Perfection within, say, 10 years, after which it
> could be standardized and only the libraries and the implementation
> would evolve.

...and if it never reached perfection? If perfection were not reachable, 
not for Python, not for any language?

>>Wouldn't it be better if everyone could contribute to the evolution of
>>a language, and then let the community decide what the best approaches
>>are?
> 
> 
> Possibly. But personally, I trust the guys in charge. Lisp might the
> very essence of programming, built into the DNA of computer science,
> but Python is the channeling of that quintessential truth into a form
> that is *easily* writeable and esp. readable by mere mortals.

No, it's not. Python doesn't have the "programs = data" feature.

>>With Python, you have to stick to the constructs the languages give
>>you. When you want to add domain-specific abstractions on the language
> 
> 
> Yes, and it gives me all I need. You can do a whole lot with
> dynamically typed OO and powerful data types.

What makes you so sure that it gives you all you need? Is this merely a 
belief, or can you back that claim by objective facts?


Pascal

-- 
Pascal Costanza               University of Bonn
mailto:costanza at web.de        Institute of Computer Science III
http://www.pascalcostanza.de  Römerstr. 164, D-53117 Bonn (Germany)