(and scheme lisp) x Python and modern langs [was Re: gossip, Guy Steel, Lojban, Racket]
ian.g.kelly at gmail.com
Wed Sep 29 23:48:06 CEST 2010
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Xah Lee <xahlee at gmail.com> wrote:
> what's your basis in saying that “list comprehension” is intuitive?
> any statics, survery, research, references you have to cite?
> to put this in context, are you saying that lambda, is also intuitive?
> “let” is intuitive? “for” is intuitive? “when” is intuitive? I mean,
> give your evaluation of some common computer language termilogies, and
> tell us which you think are good and which are bad, so we have some
> context to judge your claim.
> For example, let us know, in your view, how good are terms: currying,
> lisp1 lisp2, tail recursion, closure, subroutine, command, object. Or,
> perhaps expound on the comparative merits and meaning on the terms
> module vs package vs add-on vs library. I would like to see your view
> on this with at least few paragraphs of analysis on each. If you, say,
> write a essay that's at least 1k words on this topic, then we all can
> make some judgement of your familiarity and understanding in this
Have you actually written an essay on this topic of the sort that you are
requesting here? I googled your site, but all I could find was your
Perl-Python tutorial in which you simply stated that "This construct has
acquired a [sic] incomprehensible name 'list comprehension' in computing
industry and academia."
The obvious pun aside, I don't understand why you find the name to be
incomprehensible. All it means is that the list is being defined by
comprehension (i.e. intension) in the logical sense, as opposed to the more
common extensive definition (e.g. myList = [1, 2, 3]). The suggestion that
this nomenclature is any more obscure than "lambda", in either origin or
industry, is dubious to me.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Python-list