[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Python and Lua
- From: "Nick Trout" <nick@...>
- Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 11:29:18 +0100
> > > How is Python simpler or more powerfull?
> > The language design is cleaner and simpler I think.
> $if FLAME_MOOD
> You must be joking! They threw everything in that looks like OO.
> Then this mess of different data types with overloaded operators.
> And all those special __ identifiers. Ok, the non-freeform syntax
> is a matter of taste but I don't like it. And the last one is the
> buggy reference counting...
On comp.lang.python its often stated that Python is designed to be practical.
There are quite a few inconsistencies in the language syntactically and many
features are defined by taste rather than consistency but always the emphasis is
on usefulness. I think Python has to be the clearest and most productive
language I have used. I agree it does seem that "they threw everything in that
looks like OO" and disagreeing with the syntax of any language is a matter of
taste! You have more choice with Lua, that is its strength. Python's is that the
functionality is there and users concentrate on modules and extension libraries
hence further increasing its "usefulness".
> Really, comparing that monster of Python with the simple, lean and
> clean Lua -- your statement must be a joke.
Okay, I think Python, syntactically, it is easier to read and understand
(simpler). This is a major consideration of its design. But, cleaner well, maybe
that was rash! I'm coming out with my hands in the air! I was trying to imply
that Lua seems to try and emulate other language features but doesnt always do
so in a consistent or nice way ie. I see the foreach functionality as a bodge -
but to the credit of the designers they are fixing this. I think it is good that
the designers are staying focussed on Luas strengths eg. speed, flexibility,