"Terry Reedy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > "jayessay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > 1. Someone recently remarked that good Lisp macros are basically > > executable pseudo code. I think that is pretty much exactly right > > and is a pretty good "sound bite" distillation of what it is all > > about. > > Several years ago I remarked that Python reads like executable pseudocode. > I still think that that is pretty much right. > > Googling, I discovered that the creators of some thing I had never heard of > said the same thing about *their* language a couple of years ago. I wish > web pages, like newgroup posts, were dated so one could better trace the > history of such usages.
In the context discussed, the idea was the pseudo code was a _direct_ match to the description of the task in the _domain_. If your domain is "algorithms" or some such, then I would agree Python would work as a reasonably decent pseudo language, otherwise no. It's too low level. Same with base CL. It's too low level. /Jon -- 'j' - a n t h o n y at romeo/charley/november com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
