>>6586854I've heard that poetry is supposed to solve some of the problems, but honestly, they should work on the packaging situation, right now it's a bit of a mess compared to most other languages
For lambdas, they're just a pain to use in Python in general. It's like Guido is right next to you, and every time you write a lambda he looks at you disapprovingly. It's really subjective, but you can see that the designers made them as painful to use as possible. Compare list(map(lambda x: x.toto(), ls)) to ls.map(el => el.toto()). It's not much but it "flows in the right direction" and just feels better. The fun part is, map/filter/reduce are really fast in Python because they're loops in C instead of loops in pure Python, so you get the best of both worlds. I also find list comprehensions obtuse and more of a party trick than anything (not general enough compared to having good support for iterators)
>map/filter/reduce should be enough FP for most situations that don't call for outright using CL/Clojure/Haskell/etcWe probably disagree here but I feel like most FP concepts should be the default. Immutability, defaulting to pure functions, being very careful around state. I also usually find map/filter/reduce easier to understand than for loops, because they don't mix the what and the how
For the "situations calling for using CL/Clojure/Haskell/etc", we probably disagree a bit here too. I'm not a huge fan of CL, but it's unbeatable in stability, really fast, and gives you all the power of dynamism that you would want from a Python or Ruby. I feel like it should be the default compared to Python or Ruby, but ecosystems and shit. Clojure has some nice ideas but it would be a better language if Rick Hickey didn't spend half of his time either ranting about simplicity or strawmanning static typing (both features that you can find in Go too!). Haskell's fun and all, but I'll take the pragmatism of a regular ML over it any day.
My platonic ideal for a programming language would be basically OCaml with domains, effects, modular implicits and a proper ecosystem
>>6587254>And Common Lisp isn't even a functional language primarily.This too.
https://letoverlambda.com/index.cl/guest/chap5.html. We should really go back to when we called functions "procedures"
