|
Python is capable of functional programming that would make
most APLers happy: see David Mertz's articles at http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-prog.html and
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-prog2.html,
although Ruby was there earlier with closures, according to
Mertz.
Hank
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Lam Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 12:21 PM To: Discussion of IronPython; Discussion of IronPython Subject: RE: [IronPython] Pondering Monad/MSH and IronPython On the other hand, it's useful to avoid
context switches to get things done. For example, we recently tossed NAnt out of
our build/deploy environment and replaced it with Ruby+Rake. In NAnt, the
context switch from "scripting a task" to "writing a task" was really severe -
you had to pull out your compiler to get something done. In Ruby+Rake, we now
seemlessly migrate back and forth between sending commands to the shell, to
writing abstractions to do certain things (like config our NLBS cluster) to
writing descriptions like "this target depends on these three other
targets".
I haven't had a chance to look at the MSH language yet - apparently
something is keeping my betaplace application from being accepted (or my spam
filter is eating the reply - not sure :)) but for those who have seen it, can
python or ruby-isms produce more or less the syntax?
-John
|
_______________________________________________ users-ironpython.com mailing list users-ironpython.com@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
