Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder1.enfer-du-nord.net!news-transit.tcx.org.uk!rt.uk.eu.org!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed5.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
To: python-list@python.org
From: Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu>
Subject: Re: Questions about LISP and Python.
Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2011 06:17:51 -0500
References: <6b56c68d-22ed-427d-a05e-c503e9990a20@r28g2000yqj.googlegroups.com> <ad925470-283b-4bf2-b0e8-3854a71b640c@x7g2000yqb.googlegroups.com> <jbidi6$aq4$1@dont-email.me> <3847f890-210a-4695-b37c-b82103fd20d7@v5g2000yqn.googlegroups.com> <4EDF3C91.3000605@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0
In-Reply-To: <4EDF3C91.3000605@gmail.com>
Precedence: list
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.3377.1323256705.27778.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 55
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:16778

On 12/7/2011 5:14 AM, Andrea Crotti wrote:
> On 12/06/2011 04:36 AM, Xah Lee wrote:
>> i don't like python, and i prefer emacs lisp. The primary reason is
>> that python is not functional, especially with python 3. The python
>> community is full of fanatics with their drivels. In that respect,
>> it's not unlike Common Lisp community and Scheme lisp community.
>>
>
> I love emacs and I love python, but saying that elisp is a better language
> than python and more functional is plain ridiculous.
> Elisp is great to extend Emacs, but with dynamic scoping and side effects
> used everywhere should not even be considered between the functional
> languages, at least for how it's mainly used.
>
> This is a typical usage taken from simple.el
> (defun pop-global-mark ()
> "Pop off global mark ring and jump to the top location."
> (interactive)
> ;; Pop entries which refer to non-existent buffers.
> (while (and global-mark-ring (not (marker-buffer (car global-mark-ring))))
> (setq global-mark-ring (cdr global-mark-ring)))
> (or global-mark-ring
> (error "No global mark set"))
> (let* ((marker (car global-mark-ring))
> (buffer (marker-buffer marker))
> (position (marker-position marker)))
> (setq global-mark-ring (nconc (cdr global-mark-ring)
> (list (car global-mark-ring))))
> (set-buffer buffer)
> (or (and (>= position (point-min))
> (<= position (point-max)))
> (if widen-automatically
> (widen)
> (error "Global mark position is outside accessible part of buffer")))
> (goto-char position)
> (switch-to-buffer buffer)))
>
> Which means more or elss pop a mark from the mark ring, get the current
> buffer/position,
> then set the buffer, widen if necessary, go to some position and switch
> to that buffer.
>
> Nothing wrong with it, but basically it messes around with global state,
> as most elisp functions
> do.
>
> And how python 3 would be less functional?

It does not pretend that surrounding statements with parentheses turns 
them into expressions.
;-)

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy