Link to message: http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/7629a87adac6d0b1

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Willem Broekema metawilm@gmail.com Date: Dec 13, 2006 8:28 PM Subject: Re: merits of Lisp vs Python To:

Paul Rubin wrote:

Does this count as a "children of a lesser Python"?

This sounds like a quite derogatory first question. CLPython is not a dead and abandoned project, nor is execution speed its main goal, nor are Python semantics bended anywhere (it can run the Pie-thon benchmark). Sure, some recently introduced language features are missing, but with just a little effort that's solved...

Moreover, in Common Lisp source code analysis and manipulation can be expressed easily. CLPython thus provides ample opportunities to analyze type inference or caching schemes. Most of that is unexplored territory, I think. I like the journey so far.

How does clpython implement Python's immutable strings, for example?

Normal Python strings are represented by normal Lisp strings. Instances of subclasses of 'str' are represented by CLOS instances. That's for performance reasons. This dual-representation aspect is nicely hidden behind macros, so that even in the code of CLPython itself there's no need to worry, or even know, about it.

Why not take a look in the code -- I'll be happy to explain things.

- Willem