[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Lars Marius Garshol scripsit:
> The one thing that has been central to Scheme since it was invented:
> continuations (and to a lesser degree, closures) is completely missing
> from Python and nobody would ever even consider adding it.
Historically, closures (full funargs) came well before reified
continuations, if you look at Steele and Sussman's papers.
As Scheme things go, call/cc is an innovation.
> They are also different with regards to syntax (fixed in Python),
> scope model (dynamic and somewhat simplistic in Python),
Python variable scope is dynamic? I understood that it was static,
the same as Scheme and most other languages except Lisp Classic.
> In fact, it's difficult to see what is similar about the two
> languages. It would be interesting to hear why you think they are so
> similar.
Non-LIFO control structure. (Do I repeat myself? Very well, I repeat myself.)
--
Híggledy-pìggledy / XML programmers John Cowan
Try to escape those / I-eighteen-N woes; http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Incontrovertibly / What we need more of is http://www.reutershealth.com
Unicode weenies and / François Yergeaus. jcowan@reutershealth.com
|
