merits of Lisp vs Python

[Ken Tilton]

André Thieme wrote:
> Ken Tilton schrieb:
> 
>> The last time we went thru this a Pythonista finally said, Oh, I get 
>> it. These five lines of code I have to write all the time (two setup, 
>> one func call, two cleanup) can be collapsed into one or two. The 
>> thread will be hard to miss in Google groups (two years back?) and the 
>> epiphany appears right at the end of the thread. <hint>
> 
> 
> Functional programming is the solution here, not Lisp.

No, you do not understand. The Pythonista figured it out: a function 
would not do.

> 
> You could make that with a new function (in Python), that takes a
> function (and its args, don't remember the correct syntax).
> 
> def foo(function, args):
>   setup(1)
>   setup(2)
>   function(args)
>   cleanup(1)
>   cleanup(2)
> 
> 
> The nice thing in Lisp would now be to save a lambda with the macro.
> In Python one would fill the name space with throw away functions that
> get called only one time.

Omigod. Is that what you meant? You think macros are unnecessary because 
one could hard-code their expansions as separate functions? And that 
would constitute hiding the boilerplate? What happens when the 
boilerplate changes? <game over>

ken

-- 
Algebra: http://www.tilton-technology.com/LispNycAlgebra1.htm

"Well, I've wrestled with reality for thirty-five
years, Doctor, and I'm happy to state I finally
won out over it." -- Elwood P. Dowd

"I'll say I'm losing my grip, and it feels terrific."
    -- Smiling husband to scowling wife, New Yorker cartoon