[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Jon Harrop: >> I think most people could pick up the core ideas in a day and start >> writing working programs. > > Probably I am not that intelligent, I probably need some months :-) But > that language has many good sides, and one day I'll probably try to > learn it a bit.
It is very cool, and there are a growing number of resources about these languages. You might also like to try Microsoft's F#, which runs under .NET. >> Mathematica is expensive but learning to use pattern matching is much >> easier than learning how to write a pattern matcher and much less tedious >> than reimplementing it yourself all the time (which is exactly what the >> OP will end up doing). > > I see. This is a very old post of mine, at the bottom there are few > notes about the Mathematica pattern matching syntax: > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/93ce3e9a08f5e4c7 Yes. Lots of good points. I think this sort of functionality would be a welcome addition to Python. What is the easiest way to add such functionality to Python? Perhaps it can be written in Python? > To avoid reimplementing it yourself all the time then maybe someone > (you?) can try to write a good pattern matcher for sequences for > CPython. With such system it may become less important to switch to a > different language ;-) I think that is an excellent idea. Who will pay me? ;-) -- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Objective CAML for Scientists http://www.ffconsultancy.com/products/ocaml_for_scientists/index.html?usenet -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
