Interestingly enough, I have the same feeling with Python!
> As for the difficulty with imperative constructs, I agree it's not
> even an issue for many (Dylan, ML, et. al.) languages, but for Haskell it
> still is, in my humble opinion. I found the task of writing a simple
program
> that did a f
Hi Manuel,
It's interesting to me to note the things that were interesting to
you. :-) I'm the author of the Xoltar Toolkit (including functional.py)
mentioned in those articles, and I have to agree with Dr. Mertz - I find
Haskell much more palatable than Lisp or Scheme. Many (most?) Pyth
> 2. Macros make the parsed grammar dynamic. Usually compiler has hard-coded
> parser generated by LALR parser generator(like Happy or Yacc) compiled in.
> Introducing each macro like you proposed would need(I think) generating
> new parser(at least for the fragment of the grammar).
Dylan has mac
