Well, Paul might deserve a bit of the blame. He's written a code snippet or two of "Lisp in Python" -- unpythonic code that mimics the way Lisp does it, because he likes Lisp.
What the author means, is that Python does not feel like Lisp. It's true, but it doesn't make Python any less able to support FP. I code strictly FP for my work (science does not have state), and Python suits me fine in that regard.
I think if we had true multi-line anonymous functions we'd be in better shape. Better support for closures also I guess. Still learning Lisp as well as I knew it back in school so I'll have to decide later if macros would be a good thing to have in Python.
It doesn't surprise me that attempting to program functionally in a statement-oriented language feels like putting on the wrong size pants. The two things are like oil and water: naturally opposed.
4 comments
[ 1051 ms ] story [ 1032 ms ] threadSee: http://www.prescod.net/python/IsPythonLisp.html