On 8/25/05, Ian Bicking <ianb at colorstudy.com> wrote: > More generally, I've been doing some language comparisons, and I don't > like literal but non-idiomatic translations of programming patterns. True. (But that doesn't mean I think using generators for this example is great either.) > So I'm considering better ways to translate some of the same use cases. Remember that this particuar example was invented to show the superiority of Lisp; it has no practical value when taken literally. If you substitute a method call for the "acc += incr" operation, the Python translation using nested functions is very natural. For larger examples, I'd recommend defining a class as always. -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4