3 ms·
I assumed the definition of blub from the original PG essay, which argues that Lisp is near or at the top of the power scale. I don't really believe in a linea
by olavk 18y ago
I assumed the definition of blub from the original PG essay, which argues that Lisp is near or at the top of the power scale.
I don't really believe in a linear power scale though. Some languages are strictly more powerful than others, but there are also (i believe) different axes of power. I mention Haskell, Lisp and Python because they are three very powerful languages, but powerful in different ways. If you think that any one of them are strictly more powerful than the others, then its probably because you don't understand the power of the other.
- utx00 18y agoi don't know what you mean. could you provide an example? let's take lisp and python. in which "axis" is python more powerful and how? (i'm talking about core language features).
- olavk 18y agoThe power of Python is a consequence of a design with focus on clarity, readability and consistency. GvR understands that code is as much communication to humans as instructions to the computer, and that code is read much more than written. This makes the language very productive, but is especially valuable when you have to read or maintain code written by others. It is easier to learn from each others code and libraries. Related languages like Perl or Lisp with a focus on TMTOWTDI are more immediately gratifying because you can easier tailor the look of the language to your personal preferences. This however have a long term cost to maintainability and sharing in the community. The power of Python is an emergent property caused by readability and clarity combined with the network effect in the community.