On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 14:52:33 -0500, Ken Tilton wrote: > > > Aahz wrote: >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, >> Mark Tarver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>>I'm looking at Python and I see that the syntax would appeal to a >>>newbie. Its clearer than ML which is a mess syntactically. But I >>>don't see where the action is in Python. Not yet anyway. Lisp syntax >>>is easy to learn. And giving up an order of magnitude is a high price >>>to pay for using it over Lisp. >> >> >> Speaking as someone who had been programming for more than twenty years >> before learning Python (including a brief gander at Lisp), and also >> referring to many years of observations of newcomers to Python: Python's >> syntax also appeals to experienced programmers. >> >> I would say that your statement about Lisp syntax is wrong. Not that it >> is technically inaccurate, but that it completely misses the point, so >> much so that it is wrong to say it. One of the key goals of Python is >> readability, and while it is indeed easy to learn the rules for Lisp >> syntax, observational experience indicates that many people (perhaps even >> the vast majority of people) find it difficult to learn to read Lisp >> programs. > > No programming language is easy to read,
Well, you've just blown your credibility out the water with that nonsense. > and no Lisp programmer stopped > using Lisp because they had been using it for a month and just could not > get used to reading it. Or, to put it another way: "No programmer who learned Lisp ever gave up before he learned Lisp." I wonder, how many people gave up trying to learn Lisp because the language was too hard for them to read? Anyone like to bet that the number was more than zero? -- Steven. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list