On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 4:38 PM, Mark Janssen <dreamingforw...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think his point remains valid, from a theoretical pov. Python > prides itself on the idea of "first-class functions" and such, but > unlike the world of lambda calculus, this selling point is a bit > invalid. Because for Python (and any C-based language), it is roots > squarely in the Turing machine and its real-word implementation.
I'm having a hard time following what you're trying to say here. Lambda calculus and Turing machines are theoretical models of computation, not languages. You can model Lisp programs with Turing machine, and you can model C programs with lambda expressions. Practically speaking you would probably have an easier time doing it the other way around, due to the procedural nature of the Turing machine versus the functional nature of the lambda calculus. By the usual definition of "first-class function" [1], Python functions are first-class; this has nothing to do with functional vs. procedural programming (although it is more commonly found in the former) or to do with Turing machines (which don't even include functions as a concept). > (Note this contrasts starkly with Java(script), which doesn't seem > to be based on anything -- can anyone clarify where Java actually > comes from?) I don't understand why you would consider Python to be "C-based" or "Turing machine-based" but not Java or Javascript. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-class_citizen -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
