I'm intrigued that Python has some functional constructions in the language.

Carl Banks pavlovevidence at gmail.com
Sat May 9 03:13:44 CEST 2009


On May 8, 5:47 pm, namekuseijin <namekusei... at gmail.com> wrote:
> My point is that when all you do is call functions, syntax is
> irrelevant.  You call functions pretty much in the same way regardless
> of language:  functionname, optionalOpenPar, parameters,
> optionalClosePar.

then...

> Functional programming is all about defining functions and applying
> functions.  Core ML, Haskell and Scheme are all like that,

Yet all three use a different syntax to call functions, none of them
the "pretty much the same way" you listed above.

Haskell, Python, and (I think) ML can define operators with different
syntax than function calls, that matters.

Haskell and Python have syntax for list operations, that matters.

Haskell nexts using indentation, the others nest using tokens(**),
that matters.

I can go on, but you get the idea.  Point is: functional programmint
isn't "nothing but calling functions".

[snip irrelevant stuff about office scripting]

Carl Banks

(**) Python does using indentation to nest, of course, but not at the
expression level.



More information about the Python-list mailing list