nomail at nospam.no
Wed Jul 7 11:19:25 CEST 2004
> What reminds me that LISP was used to write Yahoo! Store first...
I read this a couple of times now.
What was so great about Yahoo-Store?
Did they have a better design, a better
Or could they just mess around faster
because they were doing it in a
more dynamic language than e.g. C.
What did Yahoo!-Store prove?
If they had done it in BASIC or COBOL,
would that justify a claim that BASIC/COBOL
are great implementation languages?
Obviously a implementation benefits if
the implementation language fits and
supports the programmer by being e.g.
But isn't the architecure and overall
design, a well documented analysis
more important? As soon as the
system is operating, requirements
change and the system must adopt.
In the future Model Driven Architecture
may put even more emphasis on
the activities happening before coding
This SCHEME vs. Python discussion leads
nowhere. Sure LISP/SCHEME are quite
unique and the language is very elegant
and powerful. But many do not feel
comfortable with the programming style
and readability (i like LISP but to me
it still looks like symbolic machine code),
so they chose Python or something else.
More information about the Python-list