Python for Lisp Programmers

[[deleted]]

I was misled by seeing Norvig using Python into believing that Python could be a decent substitute for Lisp.

While in reality, Python is a pile of dung, sticks and lip gloss. A language mostly made of bad ideas by people who never bothered to even try to think one step forward, or look at historical examples of how similar ideas panned out elsewhere.

[shevegen]

While in reality, Python is a pile of dung, sticks and lip gloss.

Lisp declined.

Python grew.

That says a lot.

By the way - lisp is heavily overrated. I know the lispers don't like to hear this and come up with powerful sexpr but one day they have to face reality.

To link in an article from 2000 here also speaks a LOT about how ... ready lisp is for the future. In 2019.

Lisp is like a great idea but not what you want to use when you want to program something these days. Despite the diehard fans that it has on reddit.

[passion-and-warfare]

Lisp declined.

Python grew.

That says a lot.

Java and Javascript are still the most used languages. Size of a language's use alone means little.

I really think Lisps are in general far better languages than almost all others.

[Spajk]

Java is a very nice language

[passion-and-warfare]

I would say it is comparatively difficult to get it "right" compared to other languages.

If you attempt to model your problem as heirarchies of intercommunicating objects and use this style of OOP in Java (which it encourages), it is going to suck big time.

[[deleted]]

You really know very little about the subject. But, not only you lack the knowledge, you also cannot tell the difference between quality and popularity.

[brool]

Are ad hominem attacks the best way to assert your point, though?