CLPython (was Re: merits of Lisp vs Python)

[Paul Boddie]

Willem Broekema wrote:
> Paul Rubin wrote:
> > Does this count as a "children of a lesser Python"?
>
> This sounds like a quite derogatory first question.

I wouldn't take it that way: it's only a quote from an opinion piece
about alternative Python implementations (albeit a contentious one).

> CLPython is not a dead and abandoned project, nor is execution speed
> its main goal, nor are Python semantics bended anywhere (it can run
> the Pie-thon benchmark). Sure, some recently introduced language
> features are missing, but with just a little effort that's solved...

What would it take to get Python people more interested in it? I've
been monitoring the site [1] and the mailing list [2] for some time,
but nothing particularly visible seems to be happening. And wouldn't a
more prominent announcement be the first step to some real publicity? I
think it only got announced on comp.lang.lisp [3] with someone picking
up on it in comp.lang.python. Perhaps getting it on the python.org
front page would attract some attention, although I accept that a lot
of Python developers would rather mess around writing C than writing
Lisp.

Anyway, I'm happy to hear that you're still working on CLPython.

Paul

P.S. Follow-ups set to comp.lang.python.

[1] http://trac.common-lisp.net/clpython/
[2] http://common-lisp.net/pipermail/clpython-devel/
[3] http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/msg/57ae88c5f9a59143