I still dip down into Scheme whenever I can justify it. The philosophy that kept Scheme from saying: "this is the one true object system" also probably endeared quite a few users to the language. You are probably right, the lack of a standard object system probably cost Scheme quite a few users. If Scheme tried to limit the sorts of syntactic binding forms, or control structures, or object models that you could have, then it wouldn't be the Scheme that we (err, I mean "I") love so much. Object model? We've got all the nails and boards and tools for that, too. Want some special syntax? No problem-we've got macros! Want some wierd contorl flow? Roll you own. More so than any other language (and I really do mean "any other language": moreso than Lisp (too big), and Haskell and ML (syntactically clumsy for what's coming next, and the types get in the way)), Scheme allows one to program as if every problem domain defines its own domain specific language. It's - View image here: -, I was just playing - View image here: -'s advocate.īut Scheme's lack of an "object model" is a strength, when considered in the context of the sort of language that Scheme is. I stand by my statement: I'd rather have Python's object model than multiple-expression lambdas any day. Yes, it's already been done in several implementations of Scheme, but it's (a) not standard, and (b) not compatible between implementations, and (c) probably not generally as flexible as Python's object model. If I were writing in any other language (except FORTRAN 77 I suppose), this would not matter. I realize it is not recommended to mix tabs and spaces, but some editors I have used that do auto-indent will always auto-indent with tabs, even though I prefer spaces, and then my code ends up mixed whether I like it or not. The other problem I have is that with some editors I end up with tabs where I think I have a certain number of spaces, and vice-versa. With Python I have lost that flexibility entirely. Some short functions, for example, can do without indentation. I usually do, but sometimes I come upon special situations where I will change the indentation slightly to suit the code. Just out of idle curiousity, would you _not_ indent loop bodies, branch bodies, and function bodies _otherwise_? It just annoys the ever living crap out of me that I *have* to indent my code a certain way. 've tried very hard to get into Python, but I can't get over the indentation thing.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |