merits of Lisp vs Python

[tayssir.john at googlemail.com]

mystilleef wrote:
> John Thingstad wrote:
> > You might even find out if you ever learnt how to use it.
>
> Donkeys have wings.

Please stop misinforming your fellow Python users. Feel free to look up
"CLOS" and the "metaobject protocol." Further, Lisp is not a functional
language like Scheme; it has unusually powerful iteration and array
facilities.

Common Lisp's OOP has multiple inheritance, a metaobject protocol,
method combinations, generic functions. I realize these sound like
buzzwords to you; I vaguely recall this being a nice video intro:
<http://www.archive.org/details/DanielGB1987>


Alan Kay coined the term object oriented programming, and I think
you'll enjoy his keynote "The computer revolution hasn't happened yet."
At 54:30, he praised the book explaining Common Lisp's metobject
protocol as being the "best book anybody's written in ten years", for
containing "some of the most profound insights, and the most practical
insights about OOP, that anybody has done about OOP in the last many
years."
<http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2950949730059754521>

And he offered a Limoge Balloon award to anyone who'd simply rewrite
the book so that the general OOP community could understand it, for
being "a great service to mankind."

The concepts in that book underlie Lisp's modern OOP system.


Further, you portray Lisp as a "functional" language. But it is a
powerful iterative language. Check out LOOP, a powerful iteration
facility. Check out its powerful multidimensional arrays, which are
adjustable and have fill-pointers.


There exist legitimate criticisms of Common Lisp, and I've even written
a page with "gotchas." One should remain appropriately skeptical of
Lisp users' claims, because they too can mislead. I wish we could
critique thoughtfully. On the basis of facts, not invented claims.


Tayssir