Re: Is Python a Zen language?
On 25 Feb 2006 15:00:37 -0800, Paul Rubin http://phr.cx@nospam.invalid wrote: Kay Schluehr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have at times the impression that many people who talk about Zen philosophy confuse it with some home brewn mixture of platonism with its transgressive move towards the true reality, a stoic hedonism of contemplation and the taoistic being-in-doing. Zen on the other side is more radical: if you erase yourself there is no-one who is in the flow but chances are that you and the computer over there are the same thing. QOTW or something. -- How about, cue the Philosophers' Song? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
On 26 Feb 2006 14:55:04 -0800, Andrea Griffini wrote: IMO another language that would be hard to classify is COBOL ... but for other reasons :-) According to Dijkstra: The use of COBOL cripples the mind; its teaching should, therefore, be regarded as a criminal offence. That makes Cobol a Zen language (since it not only changes, but also cripples the mind). And BASIC too: It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration. -- USB Priests for only 10$ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
Cameron Laird wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Kay Schluehr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . . . Lucid in the mid 80s that gone down a few years later. As it turned out that time Lisp was not capable to survive in what we call today a heterogenous environment. It was strongly too self-centered. So I . . . Smalltalk, too. And, in a different way, Pascal. I had the same thought. Smalltalk is a wonderful environment but it doesn't really play well with others. Smalltalk really wants to be *the* environment where the language is just a scripting tool within this larger environment of object manipulation, and it's really cool at that, but as a language for 'business apps' ina heterogenous environment out it's own image, it's akward sometimes -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
Crutcher wrote: You are a very silly person. Claudio -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
Crutcher wrote: You are a very silly person. You have tripped so many of my internet bullshit triggers that I think perhaps you are trolling. All languages alter the way you think. They structure the nature of questions you can ask, and problems you can solve. Do you understand 'Zen', by which I mean, have you devoted at least 5 years of study (real, 5+ hrs/week studdy) to it? (btw, I have not). If your answer is no, then you are just using this to be cool. And if you can say 'no value judgment is intended by my classification', you have absolutely no right to talk about the nature of language, let alone go about labeling things 'Zen languages'. Honestly, classification is an act of valuation, it requires an introspective assesment of your personal language system. This stuff is _old_, not new, not novell. Go read a book. Like this one: http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/S4B/the_book.html If appearing silly is the price of satisfying your curiousity then so be it. I would, however, like to point out that there is a well established usage of the word Zen in computer science. A trip to almost any bookstore will unearth many books with titles like Zen and the Art of Cascading Style Sheets, etc. A similar usage appears with the word Tao, e.g., The Tao of Objects. These usages seem to point to a deep, intuitive understanding that eludes many beginners and is difficult to put into words. My point is simply that, for some languages L, Zen and the art of L or The Tao of L are plausible titles (Zen and the Art of Lisp Programming would be plausible) but for some languages they wouldn't (The Tao of Fortran ?) Do you disagree? If you do, how would *you* articulate the difference in culture between something like Scheme and something like Fortran? I have no doubt that this usage of terms from Eastern Mysticism must be annoying to someone such as yourself who has actually studied it, but the genie can't be put back into the bottle. It is no longer really plausible to be a purist regarding words like Zen or Tao - it just makes you appear pedantic. Hopefully I have tripped less of your internet bullshit triggers this time. If not, you should really adjust your settings. -John Coleman -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
John Coleman wrote: Crutcher wrote: You are a very silly person. You have tripped so many of my internet bullshit triggers that I think perhaps you are trolling. All languages alter the way you think. They structure the nature of questions you can ask, and problems you can solve. Do you understand 'Zen', by which I mean, have you devoted at least 5 years of study (real, 5+ hrs/week studdy) to it? (btw, I have not). If your answer is no, then you are just using this to be cool. And if you can say 'no value judgment is intended by my classification', you have absolutely no right to talk about the nature of language, let alone go about labeling things 'Zen languages'. Honestly, classification is an act of valuation, it requires an introspective assesment of your personal language system. This stuff is _old_, not new, not novell. Wouldn't that be novel? Or, perhaps I should rather ask: Do you understand 'novell', by which I mean, have you devoted at least 5 years of study (real, 5+ hrs/week study) to it? (btw, I have not... but I have used Novell software products for longer than that ;-) Go read a book. Like this one: http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/S4B/the_book.html If appearing silly is the price of satisfying your curiousity then so be it. I would, however, like to point out that there is a well established usage of the word Zen in computer science. [snip; excellent answer from John deleted.] -John Coleman If I may add: word and their usage is constantly evolving, sometimes through mistakes, other times through borrowing from other languages or disciplines. (my favourite is the transcription mistake of the word collineare where the hand-written ne was transcribed as m, leading to the English word collimate ... but I digress.) Some purist, like the Academie Francaise (or, apparently Crutcher) seem to believe that one can restrict the meaning of words, or the evolution of language. The rest of us are happy to let language evolution take place to facilitate communication. Kudos to John for his examples of usage of zen and tao in computer related disciplines. Personally, I would say that Python is a zen language, not so much in the sense that it transforms the way of thinking, but rather as it doesn't get in the way of thinking. André -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
André wrote: Some purist, like the Academie Francaise (or, apparently Crutcher) seem to believe that one can restrict the meaning of words, or the evolution of language. The rest of us are happy to let language evolution take place to facilitate communication. So instead of Zen of Python, we can also call it Spam of Python ? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
André wrote: If appearing silly is the price of satisfying your curiousity then so be it. I would, however, like to point out that there is a well established usage of the word Zen in computer science. [snip; excellent answer from John deleted.] -John Coleman If I may add: word and their usage is constantly evolving, sometimes through mistakes, other times through borrowing from other languages or disciplines. Of course we can refer to Zen as the term is used in popular culture but its like deriving knowledge about taoism listening to Yoda or watching Kung Fu. Kay -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
My point is simply that, for some languages L, Zen and the art of L or The Tao of L are plausible titles (Zen and the Art of Lisp Programming would be plausible) but for some languages they wouldn't (The Tao of Fortran ?) Do you disagree? No, I don't disagree that people do this. The history of Zen and the Art of X dates from Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Repair, which is actually about Zen and Motorcycles. Really. It is also a cool title, and people have used it, and used it, and used it. I suspect that the rash of The Tao of X is based upon The Tao of Pooh (which is actually about Tao and Pooh, the bear), but I'm not as comfortable making the claim that these titles are all descendent. I have no doubt that this usage of terms from Eastern Mysticism must be annoying to someone such as yourself who has actually studied it, but the genie can't be put back into the bottle. It is no longer really plausible to be a purist regarding words like Zen or Tao - it just makes you appear pedantic. First, my exposure to estern mysticism is limited (probably less than 100 hours). I think I made that clear in my post. Second, when you ask Is X a Zen Language, you are asking for a pedantic discussion. If you seek clarity in language classification, you should not start the discussion by hijacking terms which are not understood. Adding mystery to a difficult discussion does not answer any questions, it just makes the discussion seem cooler. My central thesis: you are using a poor understanding of language to classify languages into things you understand (tool languages) and things which _you_ find 'deep' (and difficult to learn), which you call 'Zen languages'. This is ridiculous, e.g. deserving of ridicule. I am being mean because you are engaging in mental masturbation in public, and I'm worried that you might convince someone. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
Crutcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... No, I don't disagree that people do this. The history of Zen and the Art of X dates from Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Repair, which is That's Maintenance, not Repair. Subtle but important distinction. Alex -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
Alex Martelli wrote: Crutcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... No, I don't disagree that people do this. The history of Zen and the Art of X dates from Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Repair, which is That's Maintenance, not Repair. Subtle but important distinction. Since the purpose of much maintenance is to avoid the necessity for repair. regards Steve -- Steve Holden +44 150 684 7255 +1 800 494 3119 Holden Web LLC www.holdenweb.com PyCon TX 2006 www.python.org/pycon/ -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 12:48:47 -0800, Crutcher wrote: My central thesis: you are using a poor understanding of language to classify languages into things you understand (tool languages) and things which _you_ find 'deep' (and difficult to learn), which you call 'Zen languages'. This is ridiculous, e.g. deserving of ridicule. I am being mean because you are engaging in mental masturbation in public, and I'm worried that you might convince someone. I've already given my opinion on the classification of languages into two dichotomies, namely, that it is wrong to classify languages as tool-like or Zen-like [emphasis on the or]. They can be both. But your objection to the Original Poster's question is as ridiculous as you claim his question is. There is no ridiculousness to the concept that a programming language might be designed with crank-the-handle practicality in mind, and that another might be designed with academic purity and elegance in mind. Perl is a tool, you generally use it when you want a quick and dirty solution to some problem, not when you want a deep theoretical understanding of the problem. We can argue about whether programming in Lisp is fast, but the language is certainly designed for theoretical elegance. Cobol is an even more so workman-like tool language. It is Turing Complete, so anything you can do in Lisp you can do in Cobol, but nobody would want to. Where the OP got it wrong was his assumption that a language can be one or the other but not both: practicality and purity are not opposites. Most people are capable of recognising the OP's two extremes. On the one hand, there are languages that are easy to use but not deep: they make easy things easy to do, if not mechanical, but hard things are impossible. On the other hand, there are languages that require great study and theoretical planning even to do the basics. But since easy and deep are orthogonal concepts, not opposites, you also have languages that are easy to learn as well as deep. They tend to make easy things simple, and hard things, if not as simple, at least easier. There are even be languages that are difficult to learn, difficult to use in practice, and yet not very deep or elegant. For example, Intercal and the other Turing complete joke languages. -- Steven. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
I think that the classification has some meaning, even if of course any language has different shades of both sides. I'd say that with python is difficult to choose one of the two categories because it's good both as a pratical language and as a mind-opener language. IMO another language that would be hard to classify is COBOL ... but for other reasons :-) Andrea -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Kay Schluehr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . . . Lucid in the mid 80s that gone down a few years later. As it turned out that time Lisp was not capable to survive in what we call today a heterogenous environment. It was strongly too self-centered. So I . . . Smalltalk, too. And, in a different way, Pascal. One of Guido's explicit goals from the beginning of Python was that it would play nicely with the outside world. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
Crutcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: No, I don't disagree that people do this. The history of Zen and the Art of X dates from Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Repair, which is actually about Zen and Motorcycles. Actually Zen in the Art of Archery by Eugen Herrigel, which was about an actual classical Zen approach to archery. The motorcycle book title was sort of a homage but the contents are totally different. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
Actually, Python has the distinction of being both a great tool language *and* a great Zen language. That's what makes Python so cool ;-))) Ron Stephens Python411 www.awaretek.com/python/index.html -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
Mu. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
Ron Stephens wrote: Actually, Python has the distinction of being both a great tool language *and* a great Zen language. That's what makes Python so cool ;-))) Ron Stephens Python411 www.awaretek.com/python/index.html This would explain why the question is so hard to answer. It is a slam-dunk that Lisp is Zen and VBA is tool - but python really is a bit hard to classify. This is somewhat similar to the way that python seems to straddle the gap between imperative and functional languages. It has something from each worlds (whether it has the *best* from each world is a separate question) -John Coleman -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
GEB perhaps? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
Given that python code is often described in terms of being 'pythonic' or not, and that pythonic is a term that is apparently well agreed upon yet seemingly impossible to define for someone who does not already understand the word, python is probably a zen language. max -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
John Coleman wrote: Greetings, I have a rough classification of languages into 2 classes: Zen languages and tool languages. A tool language is a language that is, well, a *tool* for programming a computer. C is the prototypical tool language. Most languages in the Algol family are tool languages. Visual Basic and Java are also tool languages. On the other hand, a Zen language is a language which is purported to transform your way of thinking about programming. Lisp, Scheme, Forth, Smalltalk and (maybe) C++ are Zen languages. Disciples acknowledge that it is difficult to pick up these languages but claim that, if you persevere, you sooner or later reach a state of computational satori in which it all makes sense. Interestingly enough, these languages often have books which approach scriptural status e.g. SICP for Scheme. So (assuming my classification makes sense) which is Python? Expanding on what Alex said :-) Python is an excellent tool language, it is very pragmatic and powerful and makes it (relatively) easy to just get stuff done. Python has one of your 'zen' aspects - using Python has definitely expanded the way I think about programming. Powerful built-in support for lists and dicts, first-class functions and easy introspection enable a style of programming that is difficult or impossible in Java and C++. But Python is not difficult to pick up - it is notably easy - and I don't think anyone claims it leads to computational satori - it's more an attitude of try it, you'll like it!. Using Python does seem to spoil people - I for one hate to code in Java now. Maybe bliss is a better word for it than satori. Kent -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
What is zen? Is it something eatible (I'm hungry now)? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
Kent Johnson wrote: Expanding on what Alex said :-) *snip* Python is an excellent tool language, it is very pragmatic and powerful *snip* Kent It's a good axe, Muddy waters said about his guitar when asked by some heavy-mega guitar hero. Python is practical tool for practical problems. But if problem isn't practical, it is misdefined. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
John Coleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] an interesting statement and question. ... So (assuming my classification makes sense) which is Python? The emphasis on simplicity and the beginner-friendly nature of it seems to put it in the tool category. On the other hand, the emphasis on the ONE TRUE WAY to accomplish most tasks and the tendency for participants in this newsgroup to criticize one another's code as being unpythonic seems to move it towards the Zen category. ,,, An 'emphasis on the ONE TRUE WAY' would not be pythonic ;-) Sorry you got that misimpression. For the Zen of Python, type 'import this' at an interactive prompt. One of the lines is 'There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it.' This is intentionally more nuanced, and practical, than your paraphrase. I agree with the 'both' answer. Terry Jan Reedy -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
I don't know if python is Zend. It's quite minimalistic and it flows very well, so I guess it is a... Feng-shui language? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
John Coleman wrote: I have a rough classification of languages into 2 classes: Zen languages and tool languages. A tool language is a language that is, well, a *tool* for programming a computer. C is the prototypical tool language. Most languages in the Algol family are tool languages. Visual Basic and Java are also tool languages. On the other hand, a Zen language is a language which is purported to transform your way of thinking about programming. Lisp, Scheme, Forth, Smalltalk and (maybe) C++ are Zen languages. I think that's a horrible classification. Every language is both. Transform your way of thinking from what? There is no distinguished canonical view of what a programming language looks like, from which all others must be strange and wondrous transformations. Lisp and Forth are not tools for programming a computer? Of course they are. Algol and Java don't transform people's thinking about programming? Nonsense. -- --Bryan -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 18:31:33 GMT, Bryan Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... I think that's a horrible classification. Every language is both. I agree; it's horrible as a classification. But it's interesting concepts. One might use them to discuss the design of various languages, and how the users treat them -- as long as one doesn't get carried away. Too bad Larry Wall doesn't post to this group. /Jorgen -- // Jorgen Grahn grahn@Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu \X/ snipabacken.dyndns.org R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
Bryan Olson wrote: John Coleman wrote: I have a rough classification of languages into 2 classes: Zen languages and tool languages. A tool language is a language that is, well, a *tool* for programming a computer. C is the prototypical tool language. Most languages in the Algol family are tool languages. Visual Basic and Java are also tool languages. On the other hand, a Zen language is a language which is purported to transform your way of thinking about programming. Lisp, Scheme, Forth, Smalltalk and (maybe) C++ are Zen languages. I think that's a horrible classification. Every language is both. Transform your way of thinking from what? There is no distinguished canonical view of what a programming language looks like, from which all others must be strange and wondrous transformations. Lisp and Forth are not tools for programming a computer? Of course they are. Algol and Java don't transform people's thinking about programming? Nonsense. -- --Bryan You seem to have completly overlooked both the hedge word rough in my first sentence and the qualifications in my third paragraph. I probably was not sufficiently clear that I was describing some fairly sunjective impressions. It is a simple observation that devotees of the Scheme language view their language as more than *just* a tool for programming computers. To quote from the introduction to the first edition of SICP: we want to establish the idea that a computer language is not just a way of getting a computer to perform operations but rather that it is a novel formal medium for expressing ideas about methodology (http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/full-text/book/book.html). It is also a simple observation that experts in VBScript *don't* walk around talking like that. Scheme and VBScript are of course both Turing complete, but they seem to have radically different cultures. Do you disagree? Or, if you agree that there is a difference but don't like the words Zen vs. tool to describe it, how would you articulate the difference? Again, just curious. -John Coleman -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
John Coleman wrote: Ron Stephens wrote: Actually, Python has the distinction of being both a great tool language *and* a great Zen language. That's what makes Python so cool ;-))) Ron Stephens Python411 www.awaretek.com/python/index.html This would explain why the question is so hard to answer. It is a slam-dunk that Lisp is Zen and VBA is tool - but python really is a bit hard to classify. This is somewhat similar to the way that python seems to straddle the gap between imperative and functional languages. It has something from each worlds (whether it has the *best* from each world is a separate question) -John Coleman There is something that worries me about Lisp. If you are interested in the history of Lisp and some non-technical aspects of its culture I can recommend the writings of Richard Gabriel, who was one of the leaders of the CL standardisation commitee and founder of the Lisp company Lucid in the mid 80s that gone down a few years later. As it turned out that time Lisp was not capable to survive in what we call today a heterogenous environment. It was strongly too self-centered. So I would actually invert you categories and say that a good tool achieves to have a non-dual nature instead of a strong I. With Lisp you might be a god but according to the Zen philosophy a god is a subordinated character that preserves the illusion of self-identity. A fine thing about a tool in this context is that you have to define its identity by a relationship to something that it is not. I have at times the impression that many people who talk about Zen philosophy confuse it with some home brewn mixture of platonism with its transgressive move towards the true reality, a stoic hedonism of contemplation and the taoistic being-in-doing. Zen on the other side is more radical: if you erase yourself there is no-one who is in the flow but chances are that you and the computer over there are the same thing. Kay -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
John Coleman wrote: Bryan Olson wrote: John Coleman wrote: I have a rough classification of languages into 2 classes: Zen languages and tool languages. A tool language is a language that is, well, a *tool* for programming a computer. C is the prototypical tool language. Most languages in the Algol family are tool languages. Visual Basic and Java are also tool languages. On the other hand, a Zen language is a language which is purported to transform your way of thinking about programming. Lisp, Scheme, Forth, Smalltalk and (maybe) C++ are Zen languages. I think that's a horrible classification. Every language is both. Transform your way of thinking from what? There is no distinguished canonical view of what a programming language looks like, from which all others must be strange and wondrous transformations. Lisp and Forth are not tools for programming a computer? Of course they are. Algol and Java don't transform people's thinking about programming? Nonsense. -- --Bryan You seem to have completly overlooked both the hedge word rough in my first sentence and the qualifications in my third paragraph. I probably was not sufficiently clear that I was describing some fairly sunjective impressions. It is a simple observation that devotees of the Scheme language view their language as more than *just* a tool for programming computers. To quote from the introduction to the first edition of SICP: we want to establish the idea that a computer language is not just a way of getting a computer to perform operations but rather that it is a novel formal medium for expressing ideas about methodology (http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/full-text/book/book.html). It is also a simple observation that experts in VBScript *don't* walk around talking like that. Scheme and VBScript are of course both Turing complete, but they seem to have radically different cultures. Do you disagree? Or, if you agree that there is a difference but don't like the words Zen vs. tool to describe it, how would you articulate the difference? Again, just curious. It's a metter of perspective. Python didn't change my thinking about programming. Smalltalk changed my way of thinking about programming very radically. All Python changed my thinking about was how to better program in Python. Python to me just happened to be a very pragmmatic and productive tool for getting the job done. It happens to be comfrotable because large parts of it already fit into my way of thinking from long use in Smalltalk, but my description of Pythong would be 'cleanly practical' not 'zen' -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
Kay Schluehr [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have at times the impression that many people who talk about Zen philosophy confuse it with some home brewn mixture of platonism with its transgressive move towards the true reality, a stoic hedonism of contemplation and the taoistic being-in-doing. Zen on the other side is more radical: if you erase yourself there is no-one who is in the flow but chances are that you and the computer over there are the same thing. QOTW or something. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
On Sat, 25 Feb 2006 06:09:16 -0800, John Coleman wrote: Greetings, I have a rough classification of languages into 2 classes: Zen languages and tool languages. A tool language is a language that is, well, a *tool* for programming a computer. C is the prototypical tool language. Most languages in the Algol family are tool languages. Visual Basic and Java are also tool languages. On the other hand, a Zen language is a language which is purported to transform your way of thinking about programming. Lisp, Scheme, Forth, Smalltalk and (maybe) C++ are Zen languages. Disciples acknowledge that it is difficult to pick up these languages but claim that, if you persevere, you sooner or later reach a state of computational satori in which it all makes sense. Interestingly enough, these languages often have books which approach scriptural status e.g. SICP for Scheme. So (assuming my classification makes sense) which is Python? Why can't it be both? Why do you think Zen and tool are two different *kinds* of language, rather than just two extremes of a single continuum? There are two kinds of people: those who divide the world into false dichotomies, and those who don't. *wink* This is probably because I am not a programmer (I'm a mathematician who likes to program as a hobby and for numerical simulations) and so don't have the time to invest in picking up a Zen language. Hard-core hackers might presumably lean towards the Zen languages. Regardless of whether Python is a Zen or tool language, or both, or something else, it is incredibly easy to pick up. Just remember, and this goes for *any* new language you are trying to learn, Python is not C/Java/VB/Fortran/Lisp/Ada/whatever language you already know. -- Steven. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Is Python a Zen language?
Kay Schluehr wrote: John Coleman wrote: Ron Stephens wrote: Actually, Python has the distinction of being both a great tool language *and* a great Zen language. That's what makes Python so cool ;-))) Ron Stephens Python411 www.awaretek.com/python/index.html This would explain why the question is so hard to answer. It is a slam-dunk that Lisp is Zen and VBA is tool - but python really is a bit hard to classify. This is somewhat similar to the way that python seems to straddle the gap between imperative and functional languages. It has something from each worlds (whether it has the *best* from each world is a separate question) -John Coleman There is something that worries me about Lisp. If you are interested in the history of Lisp and some non-technical aspects of its culture I can recommend the writings of Richard Gabriel, who was one of the leaders of the CL standardisation commitee and founder of the Lisp company Lucid in the mid 80s that gone down a few years later. As it turned out that time Lisp was not capable to survive in what we call today a heterogenous environment. It was strongly too self-centered. So I would actually invert you categories and say that a good tool achieves to have a non-dual nature instead of a strong I. With Lisp you might be a god but according to the Zen philosophy a god is a subordinated character that preserves the illusion of self-identity. A fine thing about a tool in this context is that you have to define its identity by a relationship to something that it is not. I have at times the impression that many people who talk about Zen philosophy confuse it with some home brewn mixture of platonism with its transgressive move towards the true reality, a stoic hedonism of contemplation and the taoistic being-in-doing. Zen on the other side is more radical: if you erase yourself there is no-one who is in the flow but chances are that you and the computer over there are the same thing. Kay Too right. If programming language was Zen there would be no keyboards, just a telepathic interface. But I have to admit I enjoy a solidly platonic relationship with Python. I prefer to write things in the most beautiful way rather than in the most efficient. Its cost me a couple jobs, but the integrity of the product always remains intact. The Eternal Squire -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
