Re: Python becoming less Lisp-like

From: Serge Orlov (Serge.Orlov_at_gmail.com)
Date: 03/15/05 

Date: 15 Mar 2005 06:21:54 -0800

Fernando wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Mar 2005 18:23:05 GMT, Peter Seibel
<peter@gigamonkeys.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Looks like the BDFL is planning to take lambda, reduce, filter, and
> >map out of Python in the next big rev of Python (so called Python
> >3000):
> >
> > <http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=98196>
>
> Basically, it says that it will get rid of the explicit map, filter
> and reduce and substitute them by some syntactic sugar that uses them
> implicitly. That's ok, and not a big deal.
>
> It will also get rid of lambda, and it's not a great loss, since
> python's version is so limited that it's almost useless. Besides,
> given the syntactic sugar used to replace map, reduce and filter,
> there's no real need for lambda in the most usual cases.
>
> The real problem with Python is that it has been very successful as a
> scripting language in the static-typing/C/C++ world. Those
> programmers, instead of adapting their evil ways to Python, and
> realizing the advantages of a dynamic language, are influencing
> Python's design and forcing it into the static-typing mold. Python is
> going the C++ way: piling feature upon feature, adding bells and
> whistles while ignoring or damaging its core design.

You're wrong about design: http://www.artima.com/intv/pyscale.html
Quoting Guido: The first sound bite I had for Python was, "Bridge
the gap between the shell and C." So I never intended Python to be
the primary language for programmers.

>
> The new 'perlified' syntax for decorators, the new static type bonds
> and the weird decision to kill lambda instead of fixing it are good
> examples that show that Python is going the wrong way. What used to
> be a cool language will soon be an interpreted C/C++ without any
> redeeming value. A real pity...

Yeah, that was a good time. After a nice bridge between the shell
and C was built they never ceased piling feature upon feature and
kept adding bells and wristles.

  Serge.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Python becoming less Lisp-like
    ... > Basically, it says that it will get rid of the explicit map, filter ... > It will also get rid of lambda, and it's not a great loss, since ... > The real problem with Python is that it has been very successful as a ...
    (comp.lang.python)
  • Re: Python becoming less Lisp-like
    ... >Basically, it says that it will get rid of the explicit map, filter ... >It will also get rid of lambda, and it's not a great loss, since ... For a while it covered some Python ...
    (comp.lang.python)
  • Re: Python becoming less Lisp-like
    ... >Basically, it says that it will get rid of the explicit map, filter ... >It will also get rid of lambda, and it's not a great loss, since ... For a while it covered some Python ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Fate of lambda, Functional Programming in Python...
    ... lambda, map, filter and reduce won't go away before Python 3.0, ... > likely to die than lambda, as they can nearly always be expressed more clearly ... among them list comprehension and filter. ... the name 'lambda' was a poor poor choice. ...
    (comp.lang.python)
  • Re: Securing a future for anonymous functions in Python
    ... >> GvR has commented that he want to get rid of the lambda keyword for ... >> Getting rid of lambda seems like a worthy goal, ... And that is why 'lambda' is wrong -- in Python, ...
    (comp.lang.python)