There are two styles of expression in higher level languages (including Python and Clojure). Functional programming (map, filter, reduce, fold) on one side and set (and list) comprehensions on the other. This is somewhat a matter of culture, not capability. Although slightly less convenient, functional programming is certainly possible in Python, and likewise Clojure includes comprehensions. Python programmers are more likely to reach for comprehensions and generator expressions (lazy comprehensions) and Clojure programmers are more likely to reach for functional operators and lazy sequences.
Having used both comprehensions and functional languages is that they are about equally expressive, equally powerful, and generally used for the same purposes. I would much rather programming in a language that has a good tools for functional programming or comprehensions than a language that does not have one or the other. Other than that I have no strong preference. Some comprehension (style) languages: SETL (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SETL. SETL is a long-lost, but very interesting family of very high level languages based on set theory), Haskell, Python. Its interesting that Python, which started out inspired by SETL, only adopted comprehensions much later via Haskell. Python has become very SETL- like over time. Some functional (style) languages: Lisp, Scheme, ML, OCaml, Haskell, Smalltalk, Ruby, Scala, and of course Clojure. Smalltalk began the process of integrating the functional and object-oriented traditions by basing all of its control constructs on "blocks" which are just anonymous functions. Ruby's use of blocks are almost identical to those in Smalltalk. I much prefer Python's more set-theory like syntax for comprehensions to Scala and Clojure's versions, but as I mentioned, comprehensions have a smaller role in languages that emphasize functional programming. I am just as happy using using map, filter, reduce, and iterate. I suspect, since there are many more languages that emphasize the functional style that the style will continue to grow in popularity. But Python also has a fully valid and equally expressive way of saying some of the same things. I do think set-theory style comprehensions (as in Python) are often are more readable than equivalent functional expressions. Its worth paying attention. Clojure and Scala have other strong benefits, so I continue to do much of my (exploratory) programming in those. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
