Re: merits of Lisp vs Python
- From: "John Thingstad" <john.thingstad@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2006 19:49:09 +0100
On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 09:16:35 +0100, Jon Harrop <jon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Wolfram Fenske wrote:But seriously... All the interesting features that haven't originated from
Lisp (e. g. OO from Smalltalk) could in turn easily be implemented in Lisp
with a couple of macros.
I was under the impression that CLOS was non-trivial to write. There are
many other interesting features that haven't originated from Lisp (e.g.
pattern matching in SML, OCaml, Haskell, F#, Mathematica, ...) that cannot
be implemented easily in Lisp because they are intrinsically complicated.
?! Read you history.
Maxima was developed originally back in the 1960's.
It was the fist algebra system capable of symbolic algebra.
It used pattern matching. And it was written in Lisp.
When Stephen Wolfram wrote Mathematica he had been a developer of
Maxima for several years. This is where he learnt the tools of
the trade including how pattern matching worked.
Well the code is open-source now so why don't you just take a look
at how this can be achieved in Lisp.
OK so you would probably want a library instead of hard-coding it
"Paradigms in AI Programming" (PAIP) by Peder Norvig,
or "ANSI Common Lisp" by Paul Graham provide examples of this.
(With source code freely available))
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
- Prev by Date: Re: help persuading/reassuring a client that I should use Lisp
- Next by Date: Re: CMUCL 19d released
- Previous by thread: Re: merits of Lisp vs Python
- Next by thread: Re: merits of Lisp vs Python