Steve Holden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in
Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
I believe Dreamweaver-esque. I see myself writing articles and
eventually doing snazzy eye candy layouts. I do not see myself
engaging in elaborate flow control or anything terribly programmatic.
I want to concentrate
Ron_Adam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in
http://www.igda.org/seattle/
http://www.cyphondesign.com/
http://www.alphageeksinc.com/
http://www.gamasutra.com
These top three where done with text editors. If you view the source,
you will notice the formatting has good consistent indenting and there
=?iso-8859-15?Q?Pierre-Fr=E9d=E9ric_Caillaud?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Ideally, I would like an open source website + html design tool
implemented in Python
didn't you just say that ideally, you wanted a tool written in lisp
or scheme?
I honestly got a little
As is easily noticed, my website sucks. Enough people keep ragging
on me about it, that maybe I'll up and do something about it. However,
I currently have FrontPage 2000 and I hate it. Ideally, I would like an
open source website + html design tool implemented in Python, so
that possibly
James Graves wrote:
So with Python 3000, you're going to end up with a language just as
big as CL, but without the most fundamental building blocks. Ah
well, to each his own.
Preventing people from building things from scratch is probably an
industrial advantage. Look how fragmented the
James Graves wrote:
If you want to do application development, Common Lisp is where it's
at, no doubt about it. There are more and better libraries for CL
these days, and they are easier to install and manage with tools like
ASDF. Multiple open-source implementations, covering the most
Philip Smith wrote:
Conventions on type conversion are just one example. Without using
strict coding conventions the richness of the language could, and
often did, result in ambiguity. In my experience too C++ has
defeated its own object (eg portability) - I've given up in many
cases
