Python syntax in Lisp and Scheme
prunesquallor at comcast.net
prunesquallor at comcast.net
Tue Oct 7 19:40:45 EDT 2003
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Tue Oct 7 19:40:45 EDT 2003
- Previous message (by thread): Python syntax in Lisp and Scheme
- Next message (by thread): Python syntax in Lisp and Scheme
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
james anderson <james.anderson at setf.de> writes: >> >> The advantage of HOFs over macros is simplicity: You don't need additional >> language constructs > > when did common-lisp macros become an "additional language construct"? That's what macros do: they add new language constructs. I think that many Scheme students inadvertantly get taught `macros = evil'. > the other reason is that when i moved from scheme to lisp, in the > process of porting the code which i carried over, it occurred to me that much > of what i was using higher-order functions for could be expressed more clearly > with abstract classes and appropriately defined generic function method combinations. I also think that many Scheme students are mislead and inadvertantly taught that one should avoid everything but LAMBDA.
- Previous message (by thread): Python syntax in Lisp and Scheme
- Next message (by thread): Python syntax in Lisp and Scheme
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list